The cult many are in but don’t realize
Вставка
- Опубліковано 25 сер 2024
- This video explains the cult of the dialectic embraced by Marxists, Fascists and National Socialists. This includes an explanation of Dialectic Materialism and Historical Materialism using primary and secondary sources.
This video is discussing events or concepts that are academic, educational and historical in nature. This video is for informational purposes and was created so we may better understand the past and learn from the mistakes others have made.
Follow me on Instagram / tikhistory
⏲️ Videos EVERY Monday at 5pm GMT (depending on season, check for British Summer Time).
The thumbnail for this video was created by Terri Young. Need awesome graphics? Check out her website www.terriyoung...
- - - - -
📚 BIBLIOGRAPHY / SOURCES 📚
Lindsay, J. “The Dialectical Faith of Leftism | James Lindsay.” New Discourses, 5 Apr 2023 • The Dialectical Faith ...
Lindsay, J. “Marx's Ontology of Man and the Telos of History | James Lindsay.” New Discourses, 12 Apr 2023. • Marx’s Ontology of Man...
Full list of all my sources docs.google.co...
- - - - -
⭐ SUPPORT TIK ⭐
This video isn't sponsored. My income comes purely from my Patreons and SubscribeStars, and from UA-cam ad revenue. So, if you'd like to support this channel and make these videos possible, please consider becoming a Patreon or SubscribeStar. All supporters who pledge $1 or more will have their names listed in the videos. There are higher tiers too with additional perks, so check out the links below for more details.
/ tikhistory
www.subscribes...
Thank you to my current supporters! You're AWESOME!
- - - - -
ABOUT TIK 📝
History isn’t as boring as some people think, and my goal is to get people talking about it. I also want to dispel the myths and distortions that ruin our perception of the past by asking a simple question - “But is this really the case?”. I have a 2:1 Degree in History and a passion for early 20th Century conflicts (mainly WW2). I’m therefore approaching this like I would an academic essay. Lots of sources, quotes, references and so on. Only the truth will do.
"Marxists share your vocabulary but they don't share your dictionary."
I'm nicking that bastard.
They also share the natural predisposition to war and alienation, with fascism, nazism, islam etc. Especially with those practical and moral treats/gains of theirs.
James Lindsay is well on his way to succeeding in making a Marxim to English dictionary, we needed one.
I believe that is a James Lindsay quote.
It’s all ‘aufheben’.
It's called "casuistic sophistry," in English.
In another language, it's called "Bilbul." But discussing the historical roots of this rhetorical technique would be hatespeech.
Former dialectic here, the trick is using emotional manipulation to override your higher reasoning skills. The Amygdala overrides the cortex in situations of fear or pleasure.
So tell me, please, when I beat you with a pan, did I cause it or the pan?
@@SchmulKrieger touche
Sometimes you have to wake up from what appears to be a beautiful dream, if it is all in you head, it might just be a fantasy and we occasionally have to address reality.
It has been my claim for 40 years now, that Leftism - regardless of what names are used to label it - requires it's adherents and practitioners to be self-righteous and sanctimonious. Being both is absolutely necessary to be a Leftist. The psychological roots of self-righteousness and sanctimony is narcissism. Every Leftist I've every known personally or known about, was a self-righteous, sanctimonious narcissistic prick who saw/sees himself or herself as a crusader for Leftist virtue. So as unpleasant it might be, I'm saying that you were one of those people. One can't manipulate your emotions to override your reason if you don't already view your emotions as moral and necessary in the first place. I'm glad you've had your awakening, but YOU were the reason you were a Leftist.
I've never been a dialetic, but I think I got a way to sorta dismantle their idea that "the mind makes the world" by dissolving the distinction between material and ideal.
As in, it doesn't matter if you call it ideal, or material, the rules don't change.
Just got out of this cult a month ago. What a relief life has been since. I want to spend the rest of my life defeating it as now I feel betrayed, I feel like I was tricked. I was a Marxist-Leninist. I praised Stalin, Mao, the Kims, all of them under the guise of "critical support." I fell in deep but I'm glad I got out. I want to now go into law and politics and urge something must be done about the radicalization of the younger generation. Now that I'm out I have begun to recognize dialetics in the rhetoric of progressives and it scares me.
I got into it in the beginnings of COVID, the isolation from society and my growing interest in ideology was prattled on by this intense anxiety and depression that overwhelmed me. The riots of 2020 was a major push into the deep-end as I was close to downtown and I saw my city on fire while all alone in my home. Prior to the lockdown I was warning people about COVID and no one believed me. I had gained this arrogance that everyone was wrong except me, that I was the predictor of the future. I had a psychotic breakdown over the course of three months in the summer where I believed Lucifer was communicating with me but after reading some more of Engels in Socialism: Utopian and Scientific, I had replaced Lucifer with communism. I "dropped religion."
And at this point it is hard to describe what it is like once you adapt the ideology. I was ideologically blindsighted. I could not comprehend the logic behind capitalism, I could not understand life itself. It had put up such a barrier in the way I thought that I sincerely could not comprehend formal logic. It is ironic in that materialism rejects metaphysics, but it replaces God with the vanguard party. The rapture is revolution. It is the greatest eugenics project. Cull the disbelievers, forever. I believed that capitalists were lying about everything. People were misinformed, that the families of victims were just idiots. The famine wasn't on purpose, it was the fault of the Kulaks, sanctions and America caused everything, there was no idol. That's why there is a cult of personality in communist societies, Stalin is the logic of reality. It's scary stuff. It was brainwashing. It is the epitome of moralization and "rules for me, not for thee." Materialism always explained the misfortune of communists, but never explained the evil behind capitalists. They were just evil for evil's sake.
But what got me out was my university professor in my final year of college, in my class about Darwinism and its effects on society and history. My professor and I had similar beliefs, we analyzed history in the similar ways, but I could feel this ideological gap between us. He was able to fill in the blanks. I could apply the "logic" of dialetics like a parrot. But he could come up with new thoughts. In discussing colonialism, my professor brought up cultural relativism. He said that it was being weaponized to moralize history, and he raised a hypothetical to a classmate of mine who disagreed.
"If you were Cortez and you saw the native people sacrifice a human being in front of you, you would not simply stand there. You would want to end the brutality." And he was right. I put myself in Cortez' shoes, and it all clicked. Reading more of Darwin and comparing him with Herbert Spencer and later learning that Marx loved Spencer made me launch out of the ideology. It took months, primarily aided by studying for the LSAT and learning formal logic. Thank god for that. And after months of these thoughts stirring around in my head I came to the realization that Spencer and Marx were the same in that they wanted mankind to control evolution. But like eugenics, communism failed. The pull of evolution and our underlying animalistic behaviors can't keep the act for long. It's like flipping a coin. The more times you get heads in a row, the chance to get tails grows. You can't keep getting heads forever. At some point you will get tails. It's guaranteed.
Now I'm just in the center. It's about evidence to me now, not ideology. I don't want to stray into another ideology again. But after this realization I am just so happy to know that I'm an American citizen and I've been allowed to fall into such a shitty rabbit hole. I would've never understood how evil, corrupt, vicious, all encompassing that communism is. It is the ideological version of the black death, fascism incarnate. And now I want to do all I can for America to win the battle against communism, against fascism, by all means necessary.
Introverts emotionally and intellectually thrived during C19 lockdowns. Extroverts and public entertainment junkies just went flipping nuts.
I got OUT during COVID. A friend said, "It's a grieving process". She was right. A certain dream has died.
My best advice is, live the best life you possibly can. That's the sweetest revenge.
Live long and prosper.
Have a nap and then go for a nice walk in nature.
Im sorry you went through that, but if you were praising mao or stalin, i wouldnt call that comunism or marxism in anything but name.
Thats basically fashism pretending to be comunism, just like how the nazis were " the nacionalist socialist party" but the first thing they did was kill of all the actual socialists who oposed their hatefeilled ideology.
An ideology is not the lable, but the values.
Idk if you are aware, but the way you are speaking now is quite ideological.
There is no escaping ideology 1st of all, because an ideology for a human is a like an operating system, so better chose an ideology that suits you, rather than thinking that you dont have one.
This guy here misrepresents marxism utterly, he doesnt even engauge with its concepts.
The misunderstanding he has is that he thinks that every every conunist and leftist suports mao, stalin and lenin- they dont.
The comunist left has varaous factions, most of which consider stalin and mao vile and evil people, who at best, made a lot of stupid mistakes that caused famins, and at worst, did genocides in the case of stalin.
Nevertheless, beeing an anti-comunist, is in of itself an ideology.
You wanting to erradicate it only makes me wonder how?
Do you want to kill the people who believe it?
I doubt it. But if you do, how would you be any different from the ideology of stalin and mao, oe hitler?
One thing is neglected in most ideologies, and that is that people can have shi* politics, but in reality be perfectly good people.
As well as the fact that different people take different elements from even the same ideology, so its best in my view to treat people as individuals, rather than as homogenous groups.
I cant blame you for what you went through, not only bevause i went through the same tankie phase ( yes, some leftists/comunists/anarchists and so on call leftists like the ones you were " tankies" as a pejorative, because the type of leftist that suports stalin, also supports war and violence and this kind of thing)
This looks like you are jumping from one extreme to the next before considering that you can take parts you like from one ideology, and other parts you like from another, and make yourown blend.
I recomend you a youtuber which tends to get some controversy, but in my view, for the most part has the most balanced leftist views, and its Vaush.
On the other hand, if you want to understna marxist concepts and a critique of capitalism, then richard wolf explains that very well.
The problem is that if you dont like comunism, you are difinately not going to like capitalism either, because it too, to this day causes death and suffering, so knowing why it does what it does, unfortunatelly, or fortunatelly, to critique capitalism, you need something that comes out of the marxist tradition, because marxism was primerally a system for critiquing capitalism.
This religion stuff, idk, i dont worship marx, tho i use some of his concepts that make sence to me.
Leftism is sopposed to be about love, acceptance, tolerance, creativity, comunity, passifism, rehabilitative justice, authonomy, freedom and so on.
So if it doesnt have those values, its more than likely not leftism.
Have a good day
This is the exact reaction I came away with when I read Karl Marx, Lenin, Stalin, and Mao. It has all the hallmarks of a religion. This is why the Soviets hated the presence of the Orthodox Church or any religion that was not Marxism and why they promoted "science museums". 12 million Orthodox Christians died as a result of the purges against the church.
From the evi website: Voegelin dedicated his life to the study of widespread political violence and the devastation that results when totalitarian ideologies that closely resemble religions foster the notion that pursuing the creation of utopias on Earth is achievable and worth any cost, including death.
'Religion is the opiate of the masses.
(Except our religion which is not a religion - even though underneath the pretentious jargon it is exactly the same as a religion on every level.)'
They were so opposed to traditional religion because they were fighting over the same turf.
the same reason as to why they wanted to replace the family, with the state... at this very moment, they are trying to do just that, here in the US, make the population dependent on the government, and replace the family with themselves.
@@sdrc92126 achieving utopia at any cost, including deaths? That is pure liberal democracy.
@@xisotopex Cult indoctrination. Young global leaders. Hiller yutes
I was born in Soviet Union and Communism was a religion and Lenin was as Jesus Christ. We had to learn about Lenin, read books about him even in primary school. Schoolchildren were called grandchildren of Lenin. Crazy times 😂
Marx christ wood and wei led us to This Perfect Day
Wood wei marx and christ all but wei were sacrificed
Christ wood wei and marx gave us lovely schools and parks
Wei marx christ and wood made us humble, made us good.
The West has something similar. "Democracy" is a socio-political belief system, hardly different than any of the state religions from history.
They believe in 'democracy', the "political and legislative processes," and a hierarchical system of 'equality'; just like the Romans believed in the "blessings and justice" of Jupiter, Juno and Mars. Just like communists believe in the "glory of the revolution" and the "dictatorship of the proletariat." It's all a lie, designed to keep people in servitude.
See, "Americanism: The Fourth Great Western Religion", by David Gelernter.
This changed in time, in true dialectic fashion. By the late 1970s, when yours truly advanced to Leninist Indoctrination 101, it already became a laughing stock. No one took it seriously, especially the teachers (my experience may be skewed though, because I attended a Jewish school - yep, these things existed in the Soviet Union).
@jmi I was ten years old when Soviet Union collapsed , but I remember all those stories about Lenin we learned as kids, and how we gonna build paradise on Earth with the help of communism :)
For the TIK "individualism" is a religion and Alisa Zinovjevna Rozenbaum (so called Ayn Rand) is Messiah 😄
Tik: Are ya'll with the cult?
Cultist: It's not a cult. Its a dialectical science ending opression and ushering in utop-
Tik: Yep, this is it.
King of the Hill has aged like wine
The biggest opiaceum of the people, especially the most rich: communism.
Lmao
Diversity is another cult and so is lgbt
Lmfao, I just watched that episode the other day.
This is why they do not hesitate to say “Everything is political” to them it really is
They're admitting that they're constantly seeking power. Everything they do is in service to their obsessive quest for power.
the word politics is goes back to the old Greek word ''polis'' which translates to ''city state / citizenship'',
a broad definition of politics would be; that which is of concern to state and citizens, and as it is questions of morality are of great importance to the citizens, after all who wants to live in a shithole.
Knowing this background, they make the claim that everything done in public, with influence on the state, is by definition political.
This TIK guy is someone who read the works of smart people and not getting the ideas because he thinks some German is going to write his philosophical work, thinking about how it will translate and sound a hundred years later into a different language for some dork who could not even be bothered to learn latin or greek to read classical philosophy.
So because you assume that he doens't know how to read the native language, therefore, he cant possibly understand? Is this because you believe that translators everywhere doctored that 100 or 1000 year old literature?@@nocomment3294
Almost like a religious "war for souls"
Then they flip it and say “why are you making this political? This is just basic human rights.”
The fact they are trying to predict the future with their unscientific climate modells confirms what you are saying.
I saw an interview years ago of an elderly German Catholic woman who grew up before and during Nazi rule. She recalled Hitler becoming chancellor and the next time she attended Catholic mass, a large portrait of Hitler was placed in front of the alter. She said her parents cried when they got home.
I had the same feeling when I saw the picture of the "rainbow" flag hanging on the White House.
@@aspensulphateReally??? It's incredible how you see these two things as equivalent. You kinda sound like a coward
@@aspensulphate These Nazis respect only one flag and it's not ours
And when I see the American flag next to the pulpit.
@@Project-pq1qhboth of the above make my blood run cold and worry for my grandchildren!
"The more i learn about people, the more i love my dog" -Mark Twain
Dogs are man-made mutants, you would not even have dogs without people.
The more I learn about Mark Twain, the more I like Samuel Clemens.
@@J.Green-Rx But that is him though lmao
@@marley606
Mark Twain is a pen name, though, so Mark Twain doesn't exist, so it is Clemen's quote.
I guess I failed at conveying the irony or whatever it is that I was trying for last comment.
@@J.Green-Rx yeah exactly you're right i wonder why he went under that name. Samuel Clemens is a nice name why did he go by Mark Twain
I read Das Kapital when I was in middle school and was so lost that I gave up and came to the conclusion that I needed to wait until I was older. Now I’m older and have a much greater understanding of economics and philosophy and Das Kapital still loses me. Thanks for confirming my suspicion that it’s just nonsense.
Or you are just an idiot lmao
Similar experience here, because it's rubbish.
It is an early misunderstanding of eventual capitalism. Capitalism in the early mid 1900s was not really capitalism.yet.
Mercantilism, noble charters, imperialism and land feudalism (bond labor) was still very common and most of it called itself "capitalism".
Many of Marx examples were either under capitalized ventures or still merchantiles. The new socialist/communists started to splinter off 1895 to 1930 as most of Marx predictions had not come true.
He wasn't an economist or a proper philosopher...he was an identity editorial journalist. Basically a columnist.
So much "philosophy" is nonsense. Thus the majority of the writers of it do not actually love wisdom.
@@STho205yep the early capitalists were actually not wanting a free market but monopoly. And now the post-moderns that claim to be opposed to capitalism will be used by the old-timey monopolists who hold power over corporations the lower class commies think they are gonna rebel against while depending on their power.
I was taught many of these concepts at a surface level in public school. I was always hung up with practical and logistical questions and would always wonder why they didn’t seem to care if something was correct or had good outcomes. This really illuminates the reason my questions were usually met with frustration and abrupt conversation ending actions. Thank you!
@@zogwort1522 What do you mean by "negating the existence of contradictions"? How is that "magical thinking" unless you're absurdly proposing Hegel believed that contradictions didn't exist?
@@zogwort1522 I'm not going to defend Hegel's idealism, but contradictions being "just a stage in an autonomous process that reveals itself to our small minds through time" doesn't sound like contradictions not existing, nor being dismissed as "an illusion" (if specific contradictions are tied to specific stages and *have* to exist in accordance with said stages, then even if one knows the autonomous process one will still have to reckon with these contradictions.)
For better or worse I believe in free association and voluntary exchange. If I'm willing to engage in a quip pro quo and both parties are satisfied without coercion well, that's their business.
@@Oldkekistani That's nice! Now what happens when you run into someone who doesn't share your beliefs? Because free association implies forced association and voluntary exchange also implies some exchanges are involuntary. See you wouldn't need to put in the modifier if you just believed in association and exchange. That's why things are said to be at least dialectical having two sides. Lets say you sitting on a bench and someone comes by and sits next to you. Is that not free association? but was it a voluntary exchange? Does it now make a difference who owns the bench? You the other person or an unknown third party? What if you get up and leave who's bench is it then? In fact the benches location and your relationship to the other person play a big role in a simple act of sitting on a bench in whether it is considered socially acceptable for the person to sit next to you on the bench in the first place.
Once people get the essence of reading this crap by trying to avoid to choke on all the BS that is involved I beg to understand how after so many failures it still hasn't gone down the drain.
This is something that once it's seen cannot be unseen. James Lindsey, and now you TIK, are doing the important work of elucidating this reality for those willing to listen. Thank you, and keep up the wonderful work!
Agreed. Unfortunately many are not willing to listen.
Andrew Tate kinda does the same in his own way
Now you have to take it to them and throw down. You need to learn the magic and wheeled it with authority, knowing that it’s false, and that you have truth on your side. We literally have to master their tricks, and use them against them at this point.
Here is a great video that outlines how to throw down with these gnostic cult members ua-cam.com/video/x1zXFbLkfGM/v-deo.html
@Beeruz Chrysler > 'Revolutionary'
Freudian slip, commie.
This is the first time I've watched a half-hour video on political theory twice through consecutively. Great stuff. Illuminating - and horrifying.
Wow, you only had to listen to this twice to understand it.
I'm listening now, and I figure 3 or 4 times at least.
But, Tic asked us what we want and we said this!
@@jonhelmer8591 on my 3rd time haha
. ... *_ouTSane_* )-|+( *U* )+|-( *_iNSane_* ;;;; -- ;;; *ALL -- `r⚫Nd mIgHty SAnE* .. |-| .. *craZy **_IS=AS_** LAzY , **_is_** CRAzY* .. |&| .. " ""History *4* hysteria"" "
Maybe that because it doesn’t say anything
Read the True Believer by Eric Hoffer.
As a former member of the leftist cult, this is an excellent explanation. Thank you, comrade!
Well this is proof that tik IS reaching people.
Hi! Can you help me understand a part of the video. It seems to me that when having the contradiction 2+2=4 or 2+2=5 the synthesis would be 4 because 5 cannot hold in the material world. What am I missing.
Often these ridiculous ideas fail when out to the test. For example: leftist ideology: give endless money to the poor and there will be no more poor. The truth: there are more homeless people than ever riding the free gravy train.
Or: give the state enough power through socialism and you will achieve communist utopia! The truth: utopia never comes.
But it doesn’t stop them from believing it because on the surface it sounds nice, that’s why they use word games, to make it sound so morally right, so honorable, that the horrible result must be because you didn’t do the thing enough, it just needs more funding. The state needs more power. Then it will come about!
That’s hell why it’s insanity. Like he said they hold two conflicting viewpoints in their head.
How about queer gender threory? There is nothing inherent to males and females, only what society tells them. The truth: some men may act more feminine, but they are men. Only women can have babies. We needed and women to stay what they are so we have a functioning society. And changing your gender leaves you with a lifetime of medication to stay alive and not be in pain and makes you infertile.
@@anisamokrane2008 I would say apply that sense to a real world example, in the concept of gender. At the claim that gender is a construct, they are presented with the challenge of biological sex- and thus the compromise is the splitting of the two terms into meaning separate things. Sense of identity is not part of the material world
I'm a proud faascist
“Fascism is the stage reached after communism has proved an illusion.”
-Friedrich Hayek
And Fascism/nazism is humans that want to deal whith great problematics, but fail at math and reducing the numbers by killing, will never solve the ridle.
Libertarianism is the stage reached after Fascism has proved ineffective.
Oh, so that explains my past experience with fascism when I was a fascist in the past
Yes. Mussolini was a socialist but his priorities changed and he became a Fascist
@@delgande ...and Hitler
...and Stalin
...and Castro
...and Mao
...and literally every other example.
I love the subjects which you have been addressing lately which touch on how some of these political ideologies and worldviews are de facto extremely destructive religions, or how political ideologies seem to be repackaged Gnosticism. I’m so happy that you are also aware of the works of others such as James Lindsay on the subject. Thank you so much and keep going in this direction!!!
This video was particularly needed and it comes in a perfect situation, very interesting to reason with.
You love to see Tik's work.
@@dusk6159 yes indeed.
Sounds like thy are trying for a _Tower of Babel_
yeah religion can be very altruistic and the cult uses the altruistic people pretty much like worker ants.
"Trust the science."
TIK, never stop covering ideological topics. You have a gift. We need that gift
The gift of comedy, of self-parody
Only James Lindsay himself is better at doing these deep dives.
Careful anon. You're eerily looking a little culty with that kind of talk around TIK...
As a former Marxist this was an absolute banger of a video. I can't say how many times Ive dealt with this bullshit from Marxists.
How was it possible to be so dumb?
My business partner once said that the quickest way to make a liberal a conservative is through home ownership. I don't know if that worked on her, but it did make me think that we need to make it easier for liberals to own homes...
or having kids
I'm a military veteran, homeowner, parent and grandparent and have, as a result, gained a greater understanding and appreciation for Enlightenment Liberalism. What I have been able to recognize and, thus, reject through this growth process of life is the lie of Progressivism. Progressives are not liberals and hold antithetical beliefs to Liberalism, and thus the principles which formed our nation. Conservatives, on the other hand, *are* liberals in almost every respect of their professed values. Some conservatives insist on reassertion of their religious or spiritual beliefs to coincide with their political beliefs and attitudes, though that really is not necessary to be considered one. In progressive circles, I would be called "conservative" despite my beliefs being firmly grounded in Liberalism. That's not a mistake - it is the fundamental lie which both party establishments have been engaged in for generations to split the opposition to their hegemony and, thus, prevent the majority from reasserting American Liberal values, which both parties are actively antagonistic to.
What is this supposed to demonstrate, exactly? There were plenty of Northerners in the Antebellum period who had a negative view of chattel slavery until moving South and having slaves of their own, whereupon their views shockingly became in favor of that "peculiar institution." All you're demonstrating is that ownership of private property makes one more "conservative."
@@IsmailofeRegime slavery is a socialist concept
@@AverageAlien Someone forgot to tell Marx and Engels (who wholeheartedly supported the Union war effort against the Confederacy), and apparently also forgot to tell John Calhoun, Edmund Ruffin, and other Southern conservatives.
Demunsereeuw's book on Marx & Marxism has a particularly relevant chapter called "Obfuscation through complication". It discusses precisely how the dense language style is used to obfuscate contradictions, logical errors, flaws in the reasoning, etc.
This is extremely common in academia as well. Did Marxism get this from academics or did academics get it from Marxism? Yes.
Or you simply cannot understand it, because it is poorly translated into English, where English is the main issue at all, because it lacks a lot os aspects in human thinking, therefore is cannot expressed through that language and meaning gets lost. It seems that English is the language of obscuring things from public and delude people ...
@@brucetucker4847 maybe when you could read German and understand it, then there weren't such things as OP said. The academia in the USA barley existed ever.
@@SchmulKrieger If what you say is true, then only Germans should be allowed to read Marx because otherwise he would not be understood or misunderstood (and that's why the Russian and Chinese communists didn't establish communism but dictatorship maybe?). Really?
"Those who disagree with Marx, fail to understand him; and those who do, are wise men able to fathom the master."
Please.
Marx contradicted himself all the way. For instance, his materialistic determinism - that it is the economic base that determines the superstructure - stands in total opposition to his famous exclamation: "philosophers have only interpreted the world in various ways, the point is to change it."
This means that Marx believed it was the philosopher's duty to change the world -- with ideas, not with economic factors. Thus he negated his own theory of economic determinism by insinuating that philosophers (ideas) *can* change the world.
But the Marxist will say: "oh, Marx's determinism shouldn't be understood in such a narrow, pedestrian, literal way, you don't understand him," and proceed to dilute Marxian determinism to such an extent that it barely means anything anymore... Which is the point Demunsereeuw makes, and I think is a very good observation: Marxism is so ambiguous in nature that it can always evade criticism, but in the act of evading criticism, it always sacrifices a part of itself, that is to say: its advocates can only defend Marxism by sacrificing a part of Marxism.
For instance: you claim that Marx can only be understood correctly in German ("it cannot be expressed through that [other] language") thus sacrificing a part of your ideology by saying that understanding it correctly is exclusive to Germans (or maybe German-speaking, provided - I assume - they have the same linguistic affitity with the language as do the native speakers).
We can see this used in real time when you ask a "progressive" "What is a woman?"
“The truth is that communism *HAS* worked everywhere it’s been tried” this gem should be taught in schools. Which is to say: It can’t ever create utopia but it will only create misery so every time it’s been tried and it created misery, it worked.
It worked exactly as it’s intended to work, and hundreds of millions of innocent people died as a result.
@@Redeemed.of.YHVH.thru.Christ lets get those numbers up!!!
He's not completely wrong, but he got the intention part of it completely wrong. The goal isn't to kill people, the goal is to synthesize a new form of government that does work from the resulting information learned from the Government and social issues created in the wake of their Marxist project when tried in reality.
This same lineage can be understood from the Frankfurt School of Economic theories attempts to understand the failures of the Marxist Experiment in Soviet Russia, as well as their attempt, with the CIA, to DeNazify post War Germany.
I implore you not to trust Tik, however. The man is not well meaning. He seems to be lying for ideological reasons, in my opinion.
@@Redeemed.of.YHVH.thru.Christ Less then 20 million a year due to capitalism. I don't think any system is advanced as capitalism when it comes to death toll.
@bastiat4855Yes, just as with all “successful” societal structures, even those people choose to live under. Unless the vast moronic hordes spontaneously become much smarter(lol), this will continue in perpetuity.
Former dialectic: the mindset is one of *disillusionment at reality*. It all boils down to that, and subsequently anything derived from this is insane - not in touch with reality. Disillusionment at the state of reality necessarily leads to abstraction from that reality, and you can piece together where it goes from here (not doing so myself for brevity, also you might come up with some ideas along the way if you try and piece things together yourself). Btw, it would be nice if you organised your thoughts on this broad topic and made a 4 hour video 😅 this is something that’s absolutely fascinating. I will say I don’t think you can be quite so clear-cut in treating eg Kant, followed by Hegel, followed by etc as priests of religious lineage, and I reckon you’d agree, but it does look like the essence of this Greek (originally Zoroastrian?) religion as revived by German idealism was maintained. Finally I want to say when I get some more money I’ll become a supporter, you’re up there with the highest quality educational - frankly scholarly - channels on the internet let alone UA-cam. Much love ❤
This should be of interest for piecing things together @TheImperatorKnight, I’m pasting from Wikipedia:
In the third essay ("What Do Ascetic Ideals Mean?") from his 1887 book On the Genealogy of Morals, Friedrich Nietzsche discusses what he terms the "ascetic ideal" and its role in the formulation of morality along with the history of the will. In the essay, Nietzsche describes how such a paradoxical action as asceticism might serve the interests of life: through asceticism one can overcome one's desire to perish from pain and despair and attain mastery over oneself. In this way one can express both ressentiment and the will to power. Nietzsche describes the morality of the ascetic priest as characterized by Christianity as one where, finding oneself in pain or despair and desiring to perish from it, the will to live causes one to place oneself in a state of hibernation and denial of the material world in order to minimize that pain and thus preserve life, a technique which Nietzsche locates at the very origin of secular science as well as of religion. He associated the "ascetic ideal" with Christian decadence.
Very good contribution, thank you. I've been tossing and turning the subject in my head for a long time and have come to very similar conclusions. People have to be made aware of this, otherwise they will fall for this dialectic. Kind Regards from Germany.
I’m just reading through the comments and seeing yours without a response is a shame. Having studied related topics for a long time, I think it’s important that your sharing is appreciated. Thanks from the United States.
🇺🇸 🇩🇪
It amazes me just how many dots you are able to connect when pointed in a direction. Keep it up TIK, we need more people like you in the world.
As someone born and raised in a nation consumed by the virus of Communism, I instinctively recoil at the mention of the word dialectic. Word salad disguised as profundity.
I used to think dialectic is stupid, but then I realised that Hegel actually made a very astute observation. Something turns into its opposite by the virtue of its internal nature, thesis interacts with an antithesis, and then the opposite is sublated - it emerges on a higher level, even if it was seemingly suppressed. That's the dialectical approach.
For example, fight with oppression turns into oppression, or with slavery turns into slavery, let's take the woke as an example: The woke think they have completely rejected slavery, yet they also want an utopia, and their utopia where there is no oppression requires that they are also not oppressed by the need to work, hence they need somebody to work for them - a slave. So slavery reemerges here, a seeming denial of all forms of oppression requires oppression.
Let's take another example: individualism and collectivism. An extreme individualist should join a collective, because pursuing a collective's goals would mean also pursuing his own goals. On another take, an extreme individualist would want to enslave everybody else, and convince them they are working for the good of a collective, while in fact they are working for his benefit. That is taken from TIK's previous video - people trying to convince you you should work for the collective just want you to work for their benefit, that was his argument, so they are extreme individualists. Libertarianism is full of dialectical contradictions and syntheses by the way.
Or in general, an extreme position turns into its opposite, and that comes from within, it is very dialectical. For example the most extreme unregulated free market capitalism turns into monopolies and destruction of the free market. Or the most extreme opposition to modern leftism turns into a support of it, because that is the only way to destroy it - by leading it to its logical conclusion.
Hegel intended the dialectics to be applied to everything by the way. Not so sure about that, but one cannot deny the basic observation of thesis evolving because of its internal structure.
@@werrkowalski2985just sounds like projection. The anti fascists must act like fascists to eradicate the fascists etc.
Dialectical Behavioral Therapy is now the dominant form of therapy in the US.
@@finlaymcdiarmid5832 fascists and communists don't hate each other because of their ideological differences, they hate each other because of their ideological similarities. They both want complete control and dominance over society, socialism in any form can only exist if everyone is a socialist, and if can't convince them, you have to force them, and if you can't force them, you have to kill them. That's how socialism works. So fascism and communism can't both exist in the same place at the same time.
@@werrkowalski2985 war on poverty.
Tears in my eyes. Partly out of relief and gratitude to finally have found the missing and foremost relevant ingredient of 'the witch's toxic brew' - and partly out of sheer horror, starting to realize that the consequential effects of all this, spiritually, psychologically, historically, politically etc., then and now, are proof of a literal abyss, deeper than I ever wanted to know it to be. The Love & protection of The Triune GOD be with you!
Amen brother, I’ve been explaining this to people frustratedly for a while now. It’s crazy that the intellectual/spiritual environment of the 1800s had so much momentum that it will literally end the world. The end stage of history for these people is rebuilding of the temple. All of the people running things want it rebuilt so they can enthrone the antichrist and unify all the world religions. Although the groups have divergent views on the desired end state. Nevertheless the players are the Jesuit order of the RCC, knights Malta, the Jewish aristocracy and the Freemasons/Occult.
I recommend reading: Eric Jon Phelps (religion and banking) and Anthony C. Sutton (banking and politics). We will likely see the next holocaust, if you read those books you’ll know why, the Jews are in bed with Rome and drawn into the final pogrom. It’s really sad.
Also, while giving credit to some of the illuminating ideas discussed on this channel, I'm beginning to doubt that this channel has anything whatever to do with history or philosophy and is just a jerk-off forum for high brow politics.
I used to be really deep into these ideologies when I was young. They’re basically a language game that appeals to lonely people with a weak sense of self, you get an exhilarating feeling of being set apart from and looking down on the normies, speaking in a special jargon, having a clearly defined enemy.
If you look at internet culture today, you’ll see that modern communists and 3P are the ones really deep into ‘ironic memes’, and irony is all about playing around with double meanings and ambiguity, in group and out group dynamics.
In the end though, it’s unsatisfying, if you want to be liked for who you are rather than as an instrument.
Great video btw, love your work
Great explanation!
I suspect if you aren’t retired then about 6 years ChatGPT will make many a socialist and all this eyerolling at what is admittedly word games will give way to socialist advent.
"Dialectics love parody, but hate comedy"
@Beeruz Chrysler Yeah, difference is though, "TIK supporters" aka fans of reality and common sense, are backed by facts
Perfect for kids since they don't have a full developed sense of self until at least late teens or later
At age 17 I abandoned Catholicism, and became a born again athiest. At age 19, leaning left I considered Marxism, and concluded that having escaped one religion, it made no sense to embrace a new one. I am 71 now, I made a lot of dumb decisions when I was young, not becoming a Marxist was one of the few I got right.
atheist*, Gosh, probably you are a Murican.
I am sorry for you. Even at 71 you can still study the Catholic faith, read the Gospel, and find joy in it. I thank God daily that I never stopped being a Catholic. I studied my faith and deepened it throughout my life, and never regretted it. The idea that atheism is, by principle, closer to science and helps being intelligent while the Christian faith is the exact opposit, is a mere prejudice. The irony is that people who believe that they are superior because they have rejected Christianity, never understood the Gospel, do not even know exactly what is in it, and in fact are not superior at all. Being an atheist by principle (I do not mean that everybody should be a Christian : that would be contrary to the freedom of intelligence) is a mere primitiv leftist fashion, mistaking itself with a superiority of consciousness - exactly like all forms of leftism. In order to develop one's intelligence, one must have at least some respect and understanding for "the unknown". I think that Catholicism is far superior to other forms of religion, and that it can be prooven rationaly, but that is another question.
You sound just like a 71 year old guy I worked for in the late 80s. Never follow anything that ends in an ism was his last advice to me.
May Mary Most Blessed guide you during your departure.
So, what the f**k are you now, then?
Fanaticism isn't akin to marxism. You confuse marxism with accelerationism and stalinism. You pick up isolated quotes at your will to form your "thesis". You interpret it as you see fit. You use as main example, one of the worst books ever written, Stalin's "dialetics" is anything but dialetics. You also is completely ignorant in philosophy matters, something wich Marx wasn't. Dialetics is a tool of philosophy, such as ontology, logic, hermeneutics, empirism, etc etc. You clearly has no clue that Stalin's "marxism" was merely a doutrinary tool for his own and real ideology, a mecanicist view that subverted marxism to attend the soviet cast of bureocrats. He ignorantly viewed historical process as a ladder with many consecutive steps, wich is the opposite of Marx's understanding of history. You also think that Marx is a vulgar hegelian, such as Fukuyama and "end of history" thesis. You only want shock value against marxism since you yourself became adept of a religion of commodity, something closer to Mises and Hayek's utopian views for capitalism itself.
Yep. His logical key for every argument is presupposing his conclusion.
Nobody:
TIKhistory: "THAT'S A CULT!!!!!1111!!!!!"
Naaa its a cult mate!
A valiant effort. But a favorite quote of mine goes something like, "You cannot use reason to convince someone to abandon an opinion they did not adopt through reason.
I first heard it as "you cannot reason a person out of a position they didnt reason themselves into"
You can't argue the priest into deconverting, but you can shake the faith of nominal believers and arm others with the tools to do the same. Either way, trying to throw some sand in the gears is better than coming up with reasons not to bother:
Ah, that explains why TIK is so stubborn in his faith about "evil communism"
Unfortunately yes, but you might save others from falling into the same Trap.
@vantuz8264 faith? Please present evidence that communism isn't evil.
The one thing Lindsay seems to have stayed away from is the very thing that you point out eloquently. That is the ideological similarities between Fascism, Communism, and National Socialism which are all rooted in the same belief.
Demo-liberalism isn't a wholly different kind of an animal, either.
All of these ideologies originate in the French Revolution and in the myth of the "noble savage" - negation of the reality of the human nature.
@@_Dovar_ It’s worth noting that wild animals can act pretty evil. When you introduce wealth, animals tend to be kinder and behave more good.
Liberalism is far superior though, as it doesn't require a a stack of bodies to uphold the balance of power.
Lindsay doesn't dare to scare away his alt-right following.
@@_Dovar_
every type of ideology can be turned into a cult
since with enough skill and coverage you can convince any people of everything
also the only thing that is inate to humans is our adaptability, every crime has been a virtue and every virtue a crime and the idea of human nature changes every few centurries to the direct opposite
so there are ideologies that just dont work out and some that do
@@deriznohappehquite Yep. Vicious predators that like to torture small creatures for fun will sit on your lap and purr if you give them food.
Antonio Gramsci: Socialism is precisely the religion that must overwhelm Christianity.
Commies today: Noooo, we're not a cult! Stop calling us that!
I'm only a 50/50 Marxist but this seems like a weird strawman. You haven't even explained what dialectics are as Marxist present
or in layman's terms. It's basically the idea that society changes by resolution the contradictions between various social forces: especially economic forces. There are plenty of non-revolutionary socialists and also plenty of non-socialists who see value in Marx's theories.
The idea of dialectics originally came from Hegel, who was not even a revolutionary socialist! It appears that he started a cult by accident. Marx applied this to class forces: basically owners and bosses. He was heavily influenced by studying the French Revolution and how the tensions between the Bourgeoisie and the Aristocracy. resulted in class conflict and produced a new society.
'A flaw in the theory is that there is no room for the self-employed.' Hmm... Only if your reading of Marx is the most narrow possible and denies all human agency. Very few actual Marxists take this view. Neither did Karl: "Men make their own history, but they do not make it just as they please; they do not make it under circumstances chosen by themselves, but under circumstances directly encountered, given and transmitted from the past." This is literally one of his most famous quotes
Because Marx was also a philosopher and an economist, he did sometimes use technical language. Also, as his theories were new, it necessarily
needed new terms to describe things. It's why he also wrote the Communist Manifesto, as well as Kapital: it was to spread the message to a wider audience in terms that could be more universally understood. Yes, some Marxists could use clearer language but you know full well that this is true of many academics in many fields.
There are too many other errors, misunderstandings and strawmen here to be worth dealing with. You are a decent military historian but nobody should take your political commentary seriously. Not because I disagree with you but because you don't know what you are talking about. You rely on a cursory reading of Marx, without fully understanding it and describing it in big words so that a UA-cam audience is impressed but they haven't read the work you are misrepresenting. It's like Jordan Peterson but by a tank obsessive instead of a psychologist.
I’m not even a Marxist whatsoever and see amalgamated historical superficiality and absurd strawmen that undermine a serious analysis.
This video is intellectually dishonest.
Fair critique but not entirely honest.
Being strict with data is not important here. Everyone can see it and the author after pointing his mistakes for sure will agree with you.
The point of the video is the sectarian element in Marxism, especially with dialectics.
This mentality is really nicely described in "True believer" by E. Hoffer.
My favorite mutation of this mental virus is Ayn Rand and her followers 😂
You seem to believe that all the Marxists pissing on the West currently are Marxist fundamentalists, when, instead, they are CULtISTS. The purity of YOUR Marx is indomitable. OY!!!
I was a communist in my late teens and very early 20s. I bought into it because I already was somewhat of a dialectic and I bought into that, because I noticed that the technological progress would eventually lead to full automation where human work is not needed. I also noticed that companies are buying each other up, getting bigger and bigger. Extrapolating both developments 50, 100, 200 years in the future, I saw it as a great threat that eventually everything humanity needs to survive, would be owned by one group or one guy who has absolute power. Collectivizing the means of production seemed like a jolly good idea to tackle that problem. I was under the illusion that a democratic implementation of communism would be possible. After a while, I noticed from where the wind blows. Meaning, it became obvious to me, that the way my comrades were thinking about things would lead 1. to the same thing communism has always led to, and 2. to the same thing I was trying to prevent in the first place. So after reenacting the Monty Python People's Front scatch for a few times, I started questioning my belief system.
Thank you for sharing. Is there anything you can think of that would have helped you question things sooner?
"Collectivizing the means of production" in hands of the few was always the end goal of both communist and "free market" ideologues . What is a common ground between these two seemingly sharply opposite groups ? What is the synthesis of this thesis and antithesis ? 😁 Well, if you look closely, you will notice that both Marx and Rand (Mordechai and Rosenbaum) belong to a certain ethnic group we are not supposed to mention 😆
@user An obvious answer would be that these concepts were simply popular ideas in the Germany of the time, and that National Socialism was simply a kind of Gnosticism that adopted the language and symbolism of the Germans of the time.
@user Hitler incorporated racial purity ideas because of the influence the idea of the theosophical root races had on the Thule Society where Hitler got his ideas from. You've got to look back to Blavatsky.
@@aleksazunjic9672 You know about tikkun olam?
I have highly intelligent friends who have been, or were, part of this cult for 45 years now ! Many have managed to escape, and the ones who remain all have some kind of issue from their young life. Most went into teaching and social work. The word will be spread 😔. Yikes.
Yikes
It’s staggering how easily fertile, bright, young minds can be poisoned with this type of indoctrination. Look at the unbelievable number of deaths attributed to this type of rule. Look at the testimonies of those who have escaped it. Look at the proven lies after lies about what it is and isn’t. Subterfuge and propaganda and powerful tools, and they are leading us all to our doom. I’d rather perish in the dust than to surrender to such horrors.
By definition, a highly intelligent person would not fall for such claptrap.
It happened to be Peterson where I heard the explanation that merit for competence is the _least_ corrupt mode of organizing society, rank, wealth, and _earned_ privilege.
Communists disagree with merit and skill, but if they took it to sports in America, which is Black-dominated, they would want superstars chopped down in talent, hobbled so non-athletes could win, and they would demand that the low earning athletes incomes be made equal to the high performers.
White Marxists probably already discuss proposals that competitive Athletics be abolished, but that wouldn't be very popular among their target base. (We already saw Colin K describing himself as a slave to White basketball owners.)
The point being that competent professionals, whether electricians or doctors or programmers or mechanics or cashiers or business owners GENERALLY RISE while incompetent ones don't.
To the extent this is normal, it is also justice. Marxists want to flip that so the LEAST competent and LEAST talented are in charge of running everything. But even Marxists are clever enough to know that illiterate masses were unlikely to turn the USSR into a global powerhouse Empire, so they picked the Vanguard of educated Marxists actually run operations of the Dictatorship allegedly "of the PEOPLE".
@@goodyeoman4534Very sound refutation of Marx
Read Max Stirner's ''The Unique and It's Property', the first book to ever make Marx sweat. Stirner used Hegel's dialectic in order to abolish the dialectic into nihilism. Claiming that the dialectic ultimately becomes a 'nothing' out of which the individual creates himself at each instance. The dialectic of Stirner was more of a joke for all those who believed in the dialectic in his time. It also talks about the religion of ''Humanity'', the priests of humanity. Stirner anticipated Nietzsche in 1844 and pretty much claimed that communism is the last metamorphosis of religion. He called these illusions, ''Spooks'' or ghosts. That man's brain was haunted by these spooks. Interesting book I think, if you include it in your anti-dialectical analysis. For Stirner, it did not matter whether dialectics was true or not, the result would still be an egoism, or what he called the ''Unique''
Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it
I read James Lindsay’s book a year ago called “Race Marxism” where he broke down the Gnostic/Hermetic origins of Marxism/Hegelian dialectic, he’s been discussing this for like 4 years and everyone is finally catching on he was right about what CRT and wokeism really is.
Lindsay has it nailed. 👍
This is just the Christian version of hitlers "elders of zion" propaganda. I mean crt is literally a school of law and wokeism isn't even a thing, if you can't attach it to sociology, psychology and social systems then don't talk about it.
Nicholas Goodrick-Clarke's Occult Roots of Nazism is worth a read.
Gnostic Christianity/Hermeticism is not inherently bad though, all knowledge is neutral, it depends on how the knowledge is utilized and expressed. To think something evil is not evil, but to think an evil thought and then act upon it is. When someone understands these ideas and others don't have the slighest clue, they can be inverted and utilized for evil, instead of good, and nobody will even know what's happening. The Roman Universal Church knew this well when they established their dogmatic structure, inverting The Christ and turning it into a form of psychological control over the population rather than a tool of common understanding and enlightenment. What others know that you do not can be used against you.
CRT and Wokeism contradict Marxism. CRT and Wokeism are clearly capitalist.b
Thank you, Tik. Yours is one of the most succinct explanations of the Marxist/socialist/fascist cults, I’ve ever heard. Especially when given in the context of the times in which they were developed.
The only thing I'd change in your comment is the 's' at the end of the word "cults", because those are indeed the SAME cult!
Democracy and liberalism is a religion too, btw.
My conclusion about Marx is that he was one fucked up human.
I was taught dialectical reasoning in therapy. It’s totally changed the way I think. This video has given me a lot to consider. I’ve not heard any of this before. I’m not one to close my mind off to new ideas. I definitely want to learn more about this.
Sorry to say, but it didnt totally changed the way you think.
Truth is: You stopped thinking at all.
You suffered cognitive dissonance.
All dielectical reasoning is, is a way to view the world not from idealism/great man theory aka that great people move history forward by leaps and bounds, but instead acknowledges that everyone is a product of their time, and our relations with others is infinitly complex and nuanced.
Can you explain it too me? dialectics. I've seen so many times it explained yet after 100 times I don't get it.
@@tombo3689 I disagree Germans used it alot. I might not understand dialectics but I've seen it's affects in Pre-ww2 Germany. In books and leaders.
@@soliel5680 Is it not contradictions?
0:31 “Das Crapital” lmfao. Love it
If humanity could only learn from it's past.
Doesn’t help when the past is twisted to fit the current narrative
My cousin studied history in college. When he told me I said "Ah, those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it." He shook his head and said, "Actually that's bullshit. You're doomed to repeat history no matter how much you study it." That caught me off guard, so why study history then? He said, "To survive it."
That is the flaw of Homo Sapiens. Sometimes, we don't learn. But we know that. And I know that. What I want to know is how much will humanity as a whole learn from it?
Dude. They don't even recognise "fascism" when they are killing freespeech. I am very pessimistic about our species.
"Those who fail to learn from history are condemned to repeat it."
- George Santayana
it also explains why the adherents of this cult are so narcissistic: gnosticism is basically narcissism translated into theology :)
I dare to say I've studied this topic albeit in polish language. It is all true, but there is one issue: these philosophical notions attack the very process of cognition. As a result, the society, which exists in physical reality, detaches itself-regulating processes from reality. This renders the society unable to respond to changing environmental conditions, until a physical form of de-conflicting resets the perception of reality, also called 'war'.
The issue we have right now, is that the concept of money, or exchange of it, has become so immensely metaphysical, that is it without reflection in physical reality, due to all sorts of stocks, swaps, IT, luxuries, etc, that we are no longer able to respond to the changes. This puts as in a late pre-war period by collective state of mind itself. The reasons will be found.
Where most of the lost children of Atom see that event as simple war and devastation, we see creation and unification in Atom's Glow.
Gramsci should be brought up eventually. He's lets say absolutely bonkers. But is so important in modern socialist circles. He's primarily why you see so many Groups trying to create an identity out of thin air, and why terms like hegemony is often thrown around.
Huh, I never heard of him before.
@@legendarymarston9174 Gramsci believed the reason the Working Class rarely sided with the Revolution in his day Italian laborers sided with the Fascist on mass for example, was because they were raised in a bourgeois society. That they'd have to create generations raised in a NEW society to check and overcome the bourgeoisie because without doing so the Marxist will never gain popular support.
Basically he's the reason Marxist went pseudo underground and actively brainwash the youth in the modern mis-educational system.
Want to know why Activist target the young rather than the adults? Blame Gramsci. He came to the realization that they would always fail unless they raise the youth to be anti-captialist.
We are haunted by ghosts of thinkers who were so daft they flunked out of the 19th century but persistent enough to ruin the 20th... Too many "influential" "philosophers" to count, poseurs who sprung up just as the old masters all died. We'll never be rid of them.
It's not surprising because he wrote his stuff while in prison. And his manuscripts were being read by his wardens.
Not just Gramsci, but George Lukac, Theodore Adorno, Max Horkheimer, etc.
Tik, the videos you have made since your break are BY FAR the most interesting that I think you have ever produced. So much food for thought and introducing me to Lindsay and Voegil; just brilliant. Thank you so much for what you are doing and I am really enjoying the multi part examination of the dialectic religion and it’s influence on history. It’s just blowing my mind in the way that great academic discovery does! Thanks so much! Never stop!
lindsay is a buffoon
I found out about Lindsey and his colleagues a few years ago and they do such a good job of explaining what I and others were seeing unfold.
Btw, gnosticism and hermeticism are NOT the same. They are in the same general bubble of mystery cults, but unlike hermeticism, gnosticism is actually somewhat comprehensible.
Plus hermeticism has atlantis.
They are the same, same results.
@@Christusvinci you are only jumping on lindsay's gnostic hate train because, like him, youre not man enough to admit its the Js
Watching this again for like the 4th time. By God, the script, flow and information are so excellent. This is a masterclass lecture.
This was the single most eye-opening video I've seen in my life. Thank your this content. It explains everything and ties together everything I've known about the enemy over the years. Very good content.
I'm a Marxist and I have no idea what this guy is blabing, all this is just some stupid liberal/right-wing propaganda. This guy need to get laid, this is just sad.
This is endlessly more interesting than grinding over the details of the war. This is the more interesting bigger picture
Agreed!
I am absolutely a military historian first and foremost but ideas are one of the biggest drivers of the world, so therefore to not understand it is to not have an important pillar of the understanding of history, and understanding how ideas and faiths originate is a fascinating insight into the human condition
Unfortunately, in the U.S. and the west in general, this is used in both left and right wing party politics to keep both sides pitted against each other while the oligarchs that really run the show keep gaining more and more power.
“The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can “throw the rascals out” at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy.”
― Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time
So glad you found me! Your discussion here is excellent. New sub!!
It’s so crazy because I naturally steered clear of these topics when I was a teen. Always hearing about them but never really looking through them. Listening to this now if I had been just the least bit curious they would’ve gotten me. That’s crazy to think about. How easily I would’ve been sucked into a cult.
Me: Are you with the cult?
Tik: It's not a cult. Its a religion based on 2000 y. o. book, that talks about talking snakes
Me: Yep, this is it.
@@KyleCox404 Aesop's Fables talk about talking animals as well, but I doubt you'd criticize their legitimacy.
Scriptures are interpreted in many ways, often poorly, but, on the whole, most people get the message of "Love God your creator and sustainer and love your neighbor as yourself" from Scripture.
Comparing a believe system that teaches love of God and your fellow man with one that teaches that young men and women getting their genitals chopped off is a good idea is insane. Your argument is flaccid.
If you don't let go of your bitterness, it will eventually consume you.
@@Willie_Wahzoo You missed my point.
Relegion like Christianity or in the case of this guy, some stupid liberalism is also a cult and a lot bigger one at that.
So it's funny that idiots here think Marxism is a cult, when they are a part of bigger cult, that is a lot more dangerous that Marxism will ever be.
@@KyleCox404What does Christianity have to do with anything that was said? It seems like go to response to someone who criticizes something, such as Marxism in this case. Randomly bringing up Christianity in order to mock or insult the Bible and those who follow Christ serves no purpose.
@@vladtheinhaler8940 He is selectively portraying one ideology as "bad" yet ignores another that is 1000x times worse, that's why. Come on dude, are you really that stupid?
I think people believe in marxist or hegelian dialectics because it's a rationalization of history that puts you in a very comfortable situation which gives you the answer to most of the problems. Same happens to other ideologies but marxist fall into this many times.
"gives you the answer" -- should have been written between commas.
It is a solution in search of a problem, thats why its always the answer to every problem.
This is just rancid atheists not owning their shit. James Lindsay is an atheist. TIKhistory is an atheist. All 'woke'/neo-Marxists/cultural-Marxists are atheists. Marxists are atheists. Maoists are atheists. Nazis are atheists. James Lindsay and TiKhistory want YOU to believe that atheism is religion. They want you to believe that atheist communist ideology is a religion. They want you believe that atheist fascist ideology is a religion. They are full on attempting to discredit religiosity. They are hyper-subversive individuals.
@@elLooto no, then it were the solution a priori to the issue or problem, which isn't, the problem comes a priori. It's a method of analysing where the problem occurs and trying to find a solution for it, while solution doesn't mean, what you might think. Solutio can also mean to loose something, or to equalise, as the solution in an equation, that's why it is called solution. 5 + 5 = 10 , the two sides each 5 are solved as 10 and 10 is what 5 + 5 means. The issue here is simply when 5 does not stand for simply the numerical 5 but rather clouds, 5 clouds plus 5 clouds can solve into one sole cloud, or three or anything. It's what Gauß talked about, the mathematician. But I guess Anglophones are simply the dumbest people on earth. Even their inventions are made prior by other nationalities but claiming they did it.
No, they believe it for the exact same reason you accept bombing innocent children overseas = bringing them Freedom & the Free Market: you _want to_ believe it.
It is also written in an odd way because it is meant to emulate a "living" word. Depending on what perspective you are reading it- it's meaning changes.
From a person who has studied psychology and religion, the ideas of the dialectical are completely abnormal. It is fantastical thinking like the thinking of a child before the age of seven.
Because it's a Cult. It is kind of the point. Marx lets say could be described as the original Anti-Social Mom's basement boy. Based on letters written by his father, he was quite disappointed in Marx. Based on what I can find about Marx and how he lived his life, it's actually quite disturbing. If Marx was alive today he'd have a conspiracy theory blog page, and spend much of his time on Twitter. I wouldn't be surprised if it's a common trait really among Dialectics. Basically they literally do create their own reality in their heads, and perhaps as a result they perceive reality itself as a man made illusion. It's just about the only reasonable way of explaining it. Which again, is not too dissimilar to conspiracy theorist.
Yes, it's the rejection of a consistent Reality for a cosmically dualistic battle of "opposites". Just like children go through the natural phase where they pit themselves against their parents in rebellion and cry when they don't get they want instantly from the "oppressor" telling them "no".
"And apparently these people can hold contradictions in their heads at the same time, which is strange to me. It's literally insane."
Sounds a lot like double think to me, suppose that is what the dialectic is? Double-plus good description.
Cognitive dissonance. It's incredibly common.
No. It's not. Dialectics means simply to unveil contradictions through pro and con speech (analysis), which TIK here did, it was simply dialectics, even when I consider he had still a lot of contradictions made.
@@SchmulKrieger what are you saying 😭
@@Jargoed simple: Marx asks Proudhon: you define property as robbery, how do you define robbery then? Proudhon: you simply don't want to understand me, Mr. Marx. Marx: so a robbery robs the property of someone else, what does he rob - the robbery? Proudhon: hahahaha, as I said, you don't understand words. 😩 And Marx is right, Proudhon is a charlatan.
I think they're just liars. The same as a woman who pretends to be in love with a guy just because he gives her stuff and she doesn't have to work.
I told someone I was reading the great reset and Klaus says nothing and except stating the bleeding obvious, trying to scare you, giving himself a hard on ranting about chaos and death and it reminded me of (how you explained) Mein kampf. Apparently I wasn't wrong.
Klaus is a true Bond villian.....a psychopath if there ever was one. I detest the W.E.F.
Bingo!
@patientlywatching7775 OH come on dude, that's not fair to Bond villains. Bond villains are cool, interesting, and don't need to have their adult diapers changed, everytime their aging bowels give out in the back of their Rolls Royce.
@@patientlywatching7775 Yes the W3|=mis gnostic cult. They even preach immortality by the year 2029. Read _The Age of Spiritual Machines_
Scab's day job is an event organizer and can collect all the billionaires of the world "to make it so". Seriously, that book is a timeline for the next 100 year all based on scientific principles. What else can a person who can buy anything in the entire world want? Immortality. Seriously, they're all in their 80's. That would explain their fanaticism. Spengler said that civilization was quest for immortality.
Every time someone follows a German with a book and a big idea, millions die. This has happened twice, and almost thrice.
I'm a proud fan of dialectics and now I will fight for it even more. Cry.
This is the most interesting podcast on the Internet... Thank you for your time and knowledge ❤
I recall my high school government teacher(1974) explaining how the Continental Congress of 1787 formulated the U.S. Constitution via thesis-antithesis-synthesis. It was many years later I recognized the Hegelian dialectic and the fallacy of her lesson (Hegel having been born in 1770). I don’t think it was malicious but she had probably picked this idea up from a University professor with Marxist views.
Marxists always try to capture educational institutions. They also try to ban any alternative education system so they can indoctrinate the future generations.
I mean, the confederate form of government had been tried (AofC), so what can you call a Federal form besides a synthesis of the former and monarchy?
& when you have a hammer everything looks like a nail
Kant montisque and rossaue all born between 1600-1700 all used a variation of the dialectic in their philosophy, particularly their political and ontological works. I think the important lesson can be summed up in the phrase "there's nothing new under the sun." This is a refitting of old ideas. The difficult thing is that the idea of thesis antithesis and synthesis has some truth. The reality is that the world is complicated. Therefore, there is rarely a right answer, but there are tradeoffs. Synthesis between these opposite options tends to lead to better outcomes. This exists for ideas and everything else but maybe most easily seen in art and fashion. The use of contrast and harmony to create beauty which is by definition true.
It's probably much older than Hegel or even Kant and better understood as problem, reaction, solution. If the rulers want to guide the people toward a particular solution they create the problems to get them there.
I’ve always found it funny that as much as Hitler claimed to be against Marx, the two men are much more similar than different. Great video as usual .
He claimed to be against the Bolsheviks (probably because they were mostly Jewish fellas). He praised Marx's economic analysis, he just had a different solution.... but solutions to caricatures are always doomed to fail.
Edit: Just for clarification; when I mentioned Hitler's solution, I'm referring to his economic one, not his "Final" one 😅, though I understand there was a link between the two ("...capitalism was the Jews' idea..." - That failed painter fella we're talking about)
The "25 Points of National Socialism" is very similar to Marx's "10 Planks of Communism" with the addition of *Kill all Jewish people* tacked on. Marx only wanted to "Confiscation of the Property of All Emigrants and Rebels"
Just competing different visions of the same monster - socialism.
It's socialism all the way down....Research about zoroastrianism and what tips saying makes ... also makes sense about national bolsheviks talking about annihilating the human race if they don't win..in order to gbecome God...these cults are DEEPLY DISTURBING....
@@Si_Mondo Hitler argued in a book co-authored with his mentor Eckart that Bolshevism started with Moses, i.e. that it was intrinsic to Judaism.
Imagine a dialectic being used in a criminal case with contradictory witness testimony.
the one the closest to the reality is the best testimony. or you add together the truthful part of each testimony till you reach a conclusion. I am still unsure what's wrong with dialectic. It just confronting ideas to reach a conclusion that makes the most Sense with the current data.
Brilliant. I never really understood Kant or Hegel until you explained them. Now I understand the seemingly self destructive behavior of woke corporations. This is one of the best videos I have ever seen. I rarely watch anything longer than ten minutes.
Unfortunately, he doesn’t understand Kant or Hegel either…. If you’re actually interested in understanding their thought, continue your UA-cam journey. There are some legit philosophers here and there, as opposed to ideologically driven pretenders.
lol how could expect to understand anything if your attention span is less than ten minutes?
you should try reading a book
@@zogwort1522: Thanks for the engagement, I suppose, but I have no idea what you mean by “both” here. My sole point was that this particular video isn’t going to help anyone understand Kant, Hegel, or Marx.
Nothing like getting a video you actually want to watch on your lunch break!
Браво ТИК ! Користиш чињенице зарад истине. Одличан си.👏👏👏
"Well done TIK! You use facts for truth's sake. You are great"
By this logic, Freemasonry would also be a religion. 🤔
So basically “anything is possible if you believe in yourself” but to an insane degree
I do understand what it’s like to be in a cult. They use obscure language and jargon to make one curious and confused, so one thinks, “I have to gain access to the inner circle before I actually understand what the message is. In the meantime I will pretend that I understand, so I can get access and acceptance.”
very good way of putting it
Yeah, something that definitely DOES NOT HAPPEN in capitalism or church.
That last bit about cultish language is actually quite interesting.
It applies to other aspects of life beyond cults. Even detecting manipulative behavior, especially language, exhibited by some people.
Whether it is to appear to others as victims, shift the blame, etc. manipulative language in personal relationships of all sorts has the same effects.
As a fan of Metal Gear Solid, doesn't this sound familiar to a codec call famous in MGS 2?:
"Rose: Raiden, you seem to think that our plan is one of censorship.
Raiden: Are you telling me it's not!?
Rose: You're being silly! What we propose to do is not to control content, but to create context.
Raiden: Create context?
Colonel: The digital society furthers human flaws and selectively rewards the development of convenient half-truths. Just look at the strange juxtapositions of morality around you."
Have you noticed how dialectic thinkers seem to assume that there are only the two options of thesis and antithesis, never considering the possibility that there might be other options, other possible ingredients for their synthesis?
this issue about language reminds me of when i was studying Sociology in University. Many texts and 'experts' I was to read spoke like that. Their ideas were most confusing. Michel Foucault was like that.
Obscurantism is a great trick to fool the unlearned.
This is so informative. It feels like we are searching for the correct diagnosis for society's ills. We thought that we had found the illness when we analysed concepts like fascism, communism and even wokeism but they are all apparently symptoms of deeper, even more fundamental convictions.
It's scary how these destructive ideologies linger in every day politics but my hope is that people who have lived in relative freedom from oppression at least have the capacity to push this back yet again. But it will require people to demonstrate integrity, which is always in short supply.
So then is it any surprise that jordan peterson got into politics, when he deals with archetypes and fundamentals of the mind professionally?
@@BusinessWolf1 Not at all, and we should expect many more to follow. Because what separates us from previous societies duped into authoritarian revolutions is that we have had a taste of living free for so long that if we are about to lose it, we will desperately want it back. Call that a white pill if you will.
Какая идеология заставила США уничтожать коренное население Америки? Торговать рабами? Какая идеология заставляла европейцев захватывать колонии? Эти расисты и империалисты на словах были либералами, только они боролись за свою свободу и свою собственность, лишая других людей свободы и собственности. Кто же заклеймит такую идеологию?
I don't know... people today seem fairly gullible.
@@aspensulphate So trick them with the truth!
I am an ex-marxsist....got attracted at teenage due to sweet concepts like equality, welfare, each for everyone, non-exploitaton,...etc. It worked like a relegion (kind of semitic /abrahamic relegion)....while in college I was like a pentecostal lunatic....thinking about dialectical ideology, eminent collapse of capitalism, upcoming class war...etc
Miss those wasted years 😂😂😂😂
As an cictizen under communist regime from the I was born, let me share this secret to you guys living in non communist regime countries:
Communism is for its citizens, not for communist officials.
You should do a research about all those sweet-spot properties in CA, WA and I'm sure you'll find out a lot of them belong to communist officials from vietnam and china.
My friends from HS were like the Jack Mormons of Pentacostals.
Thry invited my Mom to like a banquet event. There she referenced a recent Late Night with Letterman.
The Mother and her daughter asked nicely, to forcefully for her to go to the bathroom with her. Then away from the group told my Mom, "Thry don't know we watch TV."
Yes, it's totally made up that the capitalists all over the world fund dictators and death squads in the third world to extract resources from them at a cheaper price. That's not at all out in the open. You were so delusional for believing those historical facts
"I was an ex-marxisit".....so you are back to being a marxist now????? Or maybe you want to say that you used to be a marxist and now you are an ex-marxist????
where does marx advocate for equality or welfare?
You stated multiple times that “It’s all nonsense” and I completely agree, in regards to this mental gymnastics. Talk about confusing dialectic.
My favorite part is “let’s take Marxism for example Stalin in his book” 😂😂😂 32:50
My favorite part is “let’s take Marxism for example Stalin in his book” 😂😂😂
Dialetic sees himself as a demigogue who cannot be wrong. It is why when other dialetics attack us, we stop viewing them as humans. We dehumanise. When you put up the Synthesis, I would also, call it pragmatic insanity. We do obscure things. Many of us hate details, despise talk and delay and love action. In this regard we can be nihilistic. As Mosley said; our problem was our pursuit for action ran over individual liberties. Frost 1967. In the words of the human filth Alaistar Cromwell said; I care not what action. I just want action. Good or bad, a display of power. Now that does not mean all dialecs are guilty of all. But we all have some of these traits. Born of experience in life meeting a new ideal. It is to an extent altruism. I am no longer a didletic thinker. To me tje only ideal is the Christ Princple that even Capitalism supports. If the idea of the State is not bad. It shouid be with viewing events in recent years. Wokism. But becareful because there is no Government Socialism.
You’re so right that the murders are not mistakes.
I call them the cult of babel, like the myth of the tower of babel. It makes sense with their objective of reaching heaven/utopia on earth. If you recall the punishment for their hubris, the obsession with diversity, inclusivity, and equity is really fitting.
The sin of the Tower of Babel was not “inclusivity”. It was human pride; in Claiming that a crappy ziggurat was in any way comparable to God.
He isn't implying the inclusivity is the sin.
He is implying it is the punishment.
@@deriznohappehquite Division was the cure. Therefore, an obsession with inclusivity is in a very real sense an attempt to reinitiate the Babel revolution.
The punishment was losing the single unifying language. They were given different languages which splintered them into different groups and eventually different cultures. The obsession with all this Diversity, equity, and inclusion is reunification as a single ‘voice.’ Diversity counters culture, equity counters class, and inclusion counter other ideas; all for the reunion. Then revolution to clear the culture and people in the way and as new man, united, they rebuild the tower/utopia/ heaven society. Collectivism is an old religion - is really all i am adding to the discussion.
Actually, myth of tower of Babel was created to enslave humanity. Tower was in no way perfect, but supposed "god" was afraid of it. Why ? Because Jehovah is not a god. It is more of Jewish tribal demon. If you look at his works (killing of children, plagues, and general destruction ) you would notice that. Thus, this demon was afraid of what humanity could accomplish.
TIK you are so good to us. Thank you for sharing your understanding with us. I found your channel studying WW2 content but I've learned so much more in the process.
You did a fabulous job in your method of exampling these intentionally convoluted concepts in a very comprehensible process.
I have been to many lectures on these ideas and yours by far was the best ❤
I just remember when being in the university, in my history degree, that the marxist or pseudo-marxist teachers, and they were a quite numerous group, cited Marx or marxist concepts as revealed truth. "Amen".
Karl Marx was unarguably correct in most of his observations.
You denying this out of self righteousness doesn’t change objective truths.
And that group has only become bigger. These are also the people behind the climate cult.
@@gmodrules123456789 Then they would cite what he cited, treating the concepts as the beginning and not the priest.
It’s amazing how similar the comments on this video “I used to think like this, it was damaging to me” are almost identical to the comments on videos deconstructing Christian fundamentalism.
The deep dive into an ideology or theology to show its inconsistencies is always interesting, but the truism “ignore what they say, watch what they do” works to identify cult like behavior of any kind.
I saw a comment on this video, identifying Islam as a “heresy” too. What about the Protestants? Surely they are heretics too? And the Russian Orthodox Church? Doesn’t this all lead to the same place? (I have the one true faith, all others are deluded heretics.)
Another wonderful cinematographic dissertation on politics, my friend. Hear, hear! 🍻
20:46 you can't predict what you will have for breakfast, but you can predict how humans will behave on a road or narrow paths, so you can use equations to build roads, suitable for the local demand, and predict stampedes and make sure you take measures they don't happen. I don't think you can claim humans are completely unpredictable. Someone that knows you well enough should be able to guess what you have for breakfast too.
ECP says no
ECP says no
Just for information, below is a summary of the meaning of the dialectic process :
Overall, dialectic is a method of inquiry that seeks to uncover truth and resolve contradictions by engaging in a systematic and rigorous examination of opposing viewpoints, ultimately leading to a deeper understanding or synthesis of ideas.
Strictly speaking, not a religion, however if we consider this to be an absolute method to finding solutions, it becomes religion in the hands of despots.
It's wedding truth to a falsehood, and you can see that in any place where dialecticians operate.
Most "dialectics" are too spiritually gutted to realize their religion is autistic daoism.
I honestly thought TIK was going to get blasted for this video like no other he has produced. I have to say that this audience is pretty solid and many of the comments bear that fact. Very nice that most of the discourse is civil and people are actually responding with thought and ideas instead of lashing out with name calling and muck raking..
Oh there are those in here doing the name calling thing... But yes, I'm grateful that most of my audience are good people.
The communist fad ended a year ago or so. Just like all fads it comes and goes. We’re going to go through a conservative fad soon as the rebound, but that will end eventually as well and the next NewThing™️ will come.
He sets the format
@@jeremias-serus human nature doesn't change
@@BeeruzChrysler x to doubt
At first I was disappointed that you steered somewhat away from WW2 and towards politics and religion but damn it, this is just as interesting as your work on WW2. Great work TIK!
The problem is that the Second World War cannot be understood without addressing the crisis in politics and religion that caused it. Fundamental to that is the Marxist cult of socialism.
Its very apt, since WW2 happens in the context of these ideas gaining preeminence and directing their societies.
Except the fact that what he covers is wrong.
@Shania Paige. 🙄. Do tell Shania. What is he wrong about?
@@shaniapaige4846 The cult speaks.
It seems that you don't fully understand some of the ideas that you talk about in this series of videos.
The idea of the end of history has nothing to do with apocalypse. It's about achieving a society that does not change, therefore ending history with "... and it has been so since." It is as simple as that, no mental gymnastics needed. It's nothing about ending mankind or a coming kingdom or something like that. Some say Christianity is apocalyptic Judaism. Might want to check that idea out, to flesh out the difference between apocalypse and the end of history. The most basic argument here is that you can't dream of a perfect society if no one is alive to form such a society.
The other thing (this part is more about the series on religion as a whole) is that you misunderstand Plato's idea of ideas and mixing it up with religion. I think Plato said that you can think about a horse, but you will never find a horse like the one in your head. This means that there is a distinction between an idea of a thing and the real thing. Like the difference between an ideal and an actual state, about which Plato wrote a whole book about. If your logic is applied, If I have an idea of some entity, I am somehow forming a religion about that entity, no matter if it is a concept, like the state, or a thing, like a horse. To apply that logic to something you like to talk about: Capitalism is a religion, because it is formed around the idea of the market.
I might be completely misunderstanding you, but as the critique has popped into my mind a few times while watching this series, I had to express it.
This is something I have never heard before. This is necessary information for living, and I am so grateful to you for this presentation. I am listening from Mississippi, and I hope every good blessing for you.❤️ Subscribed, Liked, Shared.
There is a cognative dissonance present in every cult member. Hopefully more people wake up.
People are, but far too many remain willfully and comfortably ignorant to the evil playing out around them.
@@patientlywatching7775 that happens as well, but I know from experience people can genuinely have good intentions, and be deceived into thinking a system or cult is the best possible answer. Deception is a nasty business. The deceived don't know they are deceived. Yes, there are always signs that something isn't right. However, without humility people literally can not escape. When you ask a logical question, you'll often find people will respond in a few consistent ways. They will deflect, gaslight, lash out and attack you, be prideful and condescending. This is because our brain has defense mechanism that kicks in when the foundation of our worldview is threatened. Anything that rises to the level of cult or false religion is an idol, and functions as the foundation by which we judge and measure everything, it is the filter through which we view the world. I dont know if you've ever been through that experiance but its extremely stressful, and feels like the earth has literally fallen out from under you. Likely why philosophy calls this a "foundation." To admit to yourself you were so wrong about something that seemed so obvious and was so fundemental, or/and that you could be so easily deceived, leads to questions of, what else am I wrong about.
If you have humility you can make it through as uncomfortable as it is to experiance. In society we now value pride, which is the antithesis of humility. For the proud it is nearly impossible for them to actually see and grasp what your saying. They know they are right, and no evidence can change that. Their defense mechanism is in high gear and they will behave illogically, defending themselves and that foundation.
Does that make sense?
Hi TIK,
I have a bone to pick with you.
I have been watching your videos for years (and in the past I have been a bit critical on some of your videos).
Before you, I used to watch other history videos (I had watched every episode of the Battlefield series).
Recently, I went back and watched an episode of Battlefield.
It used to be perfectly fine.
But now, it is a shallow poorly researched video (with obvious errors).
Because you have set the bar so high on your examination of history, I have become very spoiled.
This led me to think about the history courses I took in college.
A full semester college course is 45 hours of study.
Anyone of your Battlestorm series can be turned into a full semester college level course on the topic (with an adjustment of time to fit the 45 hours).
Your economic and political videos can be turned into a full semester courses on those topics as well.
You have a gift for this.
Don't give up.
Also, You have done an outstanding job on the Stalingrad Battlestorm series (I have watched every episode, most of them multiple times).
I look forward to you completing the series, but not at the cost of your health or sanity.
Keep up the outstanding work.
Paul
4:31 “(Karl Marx’s) actions speak louder than words,” bro what actions he was a writer his words are literally like the thing we have of him
He wasn't talking about the garden of Eden, he was talking about the longhouse, prehistorical culture, but they had the rich too, and slaves
There was an anecdote in one of the comment sections in Timcast, where the commentor was asking a socialist if the ideology was incapable of being flawed. The socialist denies this, saying it can be flawed. But when pressed for an example, the commentor was sidelined for presenting a bad faith argument.
What interest me, is that there is a certain moment where a cultist goes from being within common sense to 0% critical thinking. You can tell from the paraphrase that the socialist was rational all the way up to the question of examples.
Tim Pool is an idiot, and you watching him makes you as much of a cultist as the people you criticize.
That in itself, might have been a dialectical method. "Socialism is both flawed and flawless, therefore we shall synergize the two to create a better socialism." In saying that, perhaps he honestly believed in it, and when pressed, would say that both were true.
@@Usammityduzntafraidofanythin I would say socialism is theoretically flawless (just like capitalism is theoretically flawless) it is just that flaws develop as it is put into practice. And these flaws are then compounded as solutions that are also flawed are put into place, until you are left with a system just as broken (in different ways) as what you started with.
@@bludfyre i would genuinely say socialism is flawed.
Brain surgeons time being as valuable as a shoe polisher is a flaw. No amount of unconsenting people are going to subscribe to that. And its implementation in states is always without consent.
I am always interested in what those talking about cultist" and the shift from "common sense to 0% critical thinking" make of the requirement for faith?
I am very glad you chose to pursue more than just historical subjects TIK. These are invaluable videos.
Actually, communism did fail in Cambodia - the process of acceleration towards Heaven was stopped by Vietnamese army
One of the most clear examples of fallacy I've seen in recent years. Basically, people are calling marx a gnostic? This is dumb in so many levels I thought it was satire. People arguing about this are solely using none of the objective arguments in the dialetical theory and, in fact, creating a whole scarecrow to punch upon. As a catholic, and someone who studies theology and criticized gnosticism in the past, I find it absolutely preposterous - and ridiculous - to point something like this.
Debate and criticise marx at his philosophic theory, do not invent reasons to hate the guy. He has enough reasons already for that haha.
Just out of the top of my head:
Around 3:00 when defining gnosticism as part of marxism is just pure fiction and metaphorical analogy. We, humans, can compare anything with anything. This is what comparative litterature does. But it is just an exercise of pure fiction. Marx has nothing to do with gnosis.
Around 5:00 when talking about the End of History and equating it to apocalypticism. This is a grossly misunderstanding of what is meant of End of History. This was a topic of debate during Marx's era and that went until our modern age with Fukuyama. It was the theleological idea that things evolved to a purpose, and that mankind would reach it's end state. It is not the same idea of theological 'end of the world'.
Nothing in this video quotes the actual writtings of marx, or almost nothing. This is just fanfiction. You, and Lindsay J. are just producing a work of literary comparison of one source to another. Which is fine, I worked in this area of studies. But comparing things is not the same as implying true connection.
Marx talked about economics, so, by this comparison, was him therefore a capitalist? Was he the same to Ocatvian politics and economics in rome? Sharing broad characteristics is not the same as being part of it.