Why Do Leftists Call EVERYTHING Fascist?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 7 тра 2024
- Everything Is Fascist account: / everythingxism
Kraut's Me Ne Frego video: • Yesterdays Tactics on ...
Dev debate on Foodshops' channel: • ShortFatOtaku Met By C...
-----
Join the community discord! ► / discord
Watch Us LIVE (And Click Dat Sub Button!) ► / shortfatotaku
SFO Arcade Archive Channel ► / gameboomer
Dev Kit Channel ► / @thedevkit
Dev & Friends Channel ► @DevAndFriends
Devonetized Channel ► @SFOBackups
-----
SUPPORT THE SHOW:
BTC:bc1q6udqgvfm9uaj59l24ut7f73wvsfu707kk6pn3m
SubscribeStar! ► www.subscribestar.com/shortfa...
Streamlabs! ► streamlabs.com/shortfatotaku
Patreon! ► / shortfatotaku
Paypal! ► paypal.me/shortfatotaku
Humble Bundle Affiliate Link! ► www.humblebundle.com/subscrip...
Amazon CAN Affiliate Link! ► amzn.to/322aFAa
Amazon USA Affiliate Link! ► amzn.to/30PLxgN
Amazon CAN Wishlist! ► www.amazon.ca/hz/wishlist/ls/...
Amazon USA Wishlist! ► www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls...
-----
SFO-CIAL MEDIA! HYUK HYUK
DA TWEETS ► currently banned lol
DA FACES ► / sfotaku
DA GABS ► www.gab.com/shortfatotaku
DA MINDS ► www.minds.com/shortfatotaku
DA PARLERS ► parler.com/profile/Shortfatotaku
DA STEAMS ► steamcommunity.com/groups/Shor...
Hello Dev! I enjoyed the video, and after watching it I think I got a better impression of what you meant to discuss.
I think what you're frustrated by is not anything that belongs to classical leftist theory, but to Michel Foucault. I imagine you've read him before, but to summarise for anyone reading this: Foucault was a French sociologist that studied social control, institutions, power and how power informs processes we believe are rational or exempt of bias. Foucault had some good ideas that in many ways predicted mass-surveillance states before they were made possible by the internet and the digital era, but he's difficult to read and even harder to take at face value.
Since Foucault thought knowledge itself was one of these institutions that can be hijacked by power, a pure "Foucault-ist" is not open minded about any rationality that is not in permanent tension with itself, second-guessing all its constructions to the point of paralysis. Foucault can be so deeply skeptic of "modern rationality" as a tool oppression that it's honesty difficult to draw a line between "ideological" reason and just... critical thought. A pure reading of Foucault leaves you without the means to understand anything outside of power.
Having said that, I think this tendency to "call everything fascist" comes from Foucault. People who've been inadverently informed by postmodern analysis see power before they see reason. In truth, both leftists and liberals (insofar as they move within the Enlightenment tradition) will understand that there are individual and personal rights, and that even if say "drinking tea is not woke" as Mahatma Gandhi would've written in the Guide to Health, you can drink tea --- as it's your choice, which Gandhi acknowledges as he discourages it.
A postmodernist is more likely to ask if "you can you prove there is a non-ontological, non-vertical, objective reason to your preferences," and even more, they're more like to take objections to your rejection as "a means of enforcing the status quo." Then, "it is not you who speak, but power that speaks through you" and *there* is where you can find the accusation of fascism to anything that is even slightly normative.
Imho it's a very limiting and self-destructive way to think. Even anarchists, whose whole deal is the destruction of "unjust hierarchy," invite the possibility of "just" hierarchy with interpretation and discernment. The good thing about it is though that nobody really stays in this level of analysis forever --- precisely because nobody who has to live in the real world can do so as a permanent cynic. Postmodern analysis is definitely a feature of most modern progressivism, but I think as time goes on, people will withdraw from it as they look for solutions to stuff. Deconstruction, after all, is completely amoral and it can leave us understanding a structure without knowing how to relate to it. Most effective political actors spend more time thinking about how to act instead of, well, thinking about thinking.
In any case I'd advice people worried about "your personal life being taken away" not to worry. Even if your lifestyle is more old-fashioned (and therefore uncool in the opinion of teenagers), you will have ways of existing and being happy with yourself in any system based on rights and freedoms. Here is somewhere where both Dev (liberal) and I (socialist) don't really disagree, because the point of politics is being happy, and getting as close as we can to living the lives we want.
Thanks for posting and I await your video on the only Canadian in good standing with teenagers (Drake) being ousted as a nonce.
hi rav you commie
Wall of text moment
"No offense, but that sounds like some fng commie gobbledygook."
- Norm Macdonald, a Canadian in the greatest of standing.
mucho texto
"No offense, but it sounds like some ****ing commie gobbledygook"
- Norm Macdonald
"Fascist" in the modern lexicon has the same meaning as "Heretic".
Basically this, but they don't want to admit Fascism is Socialist in any way, shape, or form.
The more things change the more it stays the same
Well, fascism is a branch of socialism, so...
Yes.
"Hate Speech" is "Blasphemy".
@@rcrawford42 Ye, but they would die rather than admit it.
"Thomas the Tank Engine is fascist" as if he couldn't get more based.
Well, he's a very useful engine. He doesn't lay about, he performs his function according to his duty and station in society. Unironically, yes. Communists have ascribed to their enemies every strength and virtue, and adopted every weakness and vice as their own. I agree with their assessment.
Judge: Thomas what were you doing at a certain station in Auschwitz 1942? What happened to the passengers?
Thomas: ...
Have you watched shed 17
@@TheLurker1647💀
@@ARandomLetterA he was just following orders
When all you've got is a hammer and sicle, everything looks like a bundle of sticks
under rated comment
Dude youre so creative for this lol
Lmao the communists never learn 😂
w comment
😂😂😂
If Starship Troopers taught me anything, fascism is when cool uniforms.
And 100% media transparency with a side of 100% political accountability.
People will turn their gun on anything or anyone as long as they get a cool jacket out of the deal. 😅
Spiffy uniforms + propaganda broadcasts are what make a script called "Bug Hunt on Outpost 9" a satire of fascism. So if we dress Shrek and Donkey in uniforms, put a few newsreels and call it a satire of the mustache man's works, "Get out of my swamp!" could become the new blood&soil!
If Starship Troopers taught me anything, is that fascism means being part of a motivated team of people who care about things instead of trying to wreck society from within.
Starship Troopers the book is “what if every voter was as based as Filipino immigrants?”
Don't they realize they're painting fascism in a positive light, by claiming almost everything good IS fascism. It's the whole "Come to the dark side, we have cookies" meme, but it's mirror opposite. Them- "Don't join the dark side. They have cookies!" Me - "Really? I love cookies! Guess I'm joining the dark side."
It's the same way American Christians destroyed their image in the Satanic Panic. Everything was Satan, including everything fun. Well in that case, Satan must be the good guy.
Yes, that is a rather stupid PR move in retrospect. The problem with hating every problematic past figure is that despite the often horrendous things those people have done, they still had a great amount of merit and prestige that cannot be handwaved away. George Washington undoubtedly held casual racial views that even those on the Far-Right today would find extreme, yet he still founded the country that took over the world. And what have his critics accomplished compared to that?
@@omegarealmsbans1914The critics took over the country after it had taken over the world.
Come to the Mirror Universe. We have cool moustaches and everyone gets a dagger!
The fact that you see those traits as "good" proves their point. You are just unaware about how the things you believe are "good" actually are harmful for society.
Same reason people like to call people Racist, cause they view it as an instant gotcha that wins any argument.
In reality, it just make themselves look like cowards and denialists. I refuse to call them ignorant and its synonyms because that would imply that they don't know what they are saying and doing.
@@multilad816 They always are aware of it they just think the means justify the end
Thankfully this tactics seems to have run its course. Someone calling someone else "racist" at this point usually just elicits eye rolls.
@@multilad816And notice when and where they use this cowardly and disingenuous tactic. They try to use it to swing emotions and turn a debate into a public crucifixion. These leftist pseudo-intellectuals truly are a heinous bunch.
I just say "yes I am". It takes the wind out of their sails
The far-left has quite literally made fun = fascism in their unceasing attempts to become the supreme moral police. It's legitimately hilarious in a cosmic sort of way.
Like when the old right would paint fun = Satanism! Looks like we came full circle!
Yes. The un-ironic omnipotent moral busybodies. 🤭
They say fascism is all powerful, yet weak. Cowardly, yet clever. Like a certain some groups were called by said facists. Basically becoming what you tried to destroy.
The Germans, The French who recently won election over the LEFT, Referred to them as Woke Communists. Just say`in.
Vaush calls himself a Libertarian Socialist? Did he not find anything more diametrically opposed to wedge in there? Legitimately, how can those two ideals even coincide? If I value liberty, I cannot force you to do anything. If I value socialism, I MUST force you to do things.
"Libertarian Socialists" are closet authoritarians. They will chide "tankies" but if Libertarian Socialists ever gain power over a country, they will come tankies overnight.
both hemispheres of his brain are diametrically opposing each other.
Indeed, as Hayek wrote in the Road to Serfdom partial control MUST lead to total control.
@@enraikow6109the only thing holding both hemispheres together are horsecocks
Similar to anarcho-communist. You can’t have both simultaneously.
Even George Orwell who was well and alive during the era of actual Fascist dictators saw where the winds were heading in how even over 60 years ago the word “Fascist” lost all meaning!
"Fascism" had no meaning before the 1920s and it has no meaning in the 2020s.
Whoever replied to this your comment is hidden from view
@@jasonhenry8067 I know. All my replies are hidden from view.
"3 replies" and yet i see only 1 hmm....
@@jvmango3057 It's not my fault, I'm shadowbanned!
Seriously engaging with opposing views is hard. Dismissing them with umbrella terms is easy.
This 100 percent
"you disagree with me?"
"...literal nazi"
Sounds like commie talk.
"why engage with opposing views? There's no objective truth nor good or bad, there's only power, oppressors and oppressed"
It's the same way cults control their flock. Convince them that the source matters more than the content, that way they only listen to cult approved sources.
"libertarian socialists" is the 2nd biggest oxymoron after Vaush himself.
Vaush is just a regular moron.
agreed
IMO the biggest takeaway from this breakdown (which was spot on) is that the more you misuse a word like "fascist" or "racist" or "homophobic", the more jaded people become to being called that, and the more emboldened people who really are those things become. "I don't care if you call me a fascist" can quickly lead to "Yes, I'm a fascist, and I don't care if that bothers you."
Yeah, what is funny is that those opposed to "fascism" will breed contempt against themselves and create their own boogieman.
Spite is a powerful motivator
Honestly, that's the pushback the world needs.
the even bigger take away is that roast battles are way more productive than calling people fascist.
Misuse is what exactly? Those are concrete moral accusations. They are not thrown around easily.
Still calling Vaush a “libertarian” socialist is so absurd it’s almost funny
He believes people should be free to do as they please... as long as what they please is consistent with socialism.
The leftists love to talk about intolerance towards intolerance... this is also a twisted version of that. They somehow justify in their head that being constrained by their narrow, radical views is necessary to maintain what they pretend is liberty.
This is eerily similar to religious cults BTW - where they simultaneously see salvation as all things good, you do whatever you want, 72 virgins, whatever - but to achieve salvation, you have to live by the rules of the deity in question, which rules are obviously designed to make your life miserable. Thus begging the quesion - if heaven is filled with morally rightious, two faced, uptight religious radicals, why would I ever join your cult?
Same thing withcsocialism. Why would I want to partake in your revolution, if it makes life even more constrained?
That's how he chooses to describe himself. He's the farthest from being any sort "Iibertarian" but leftist aren't really known for telling the truth.
isnt he the Horse cock gazer guy?
Libertarian socialist just like coummist capitalist.
I just call him a demented lobotomite
Because they don't actually know what fascism is, and it's easier to call your opponent a fascist so you can dismiss any points they raise than to actually address their claims.
Best thing to ask them is, "what's wrong with fascism?"
They rarely have a good answer.
@@bushturkey798I mean they'll say shit but it's mostly moral word salad that could easily be said about every other system
@@bushturkey798 Nah, they just make allusions to Nazis, and then call you a Nazi.
@@AmaryInkawult True. Then you throw the old "how is communism not that. The key part is to go to your happy place as they prattle , so your brain doesn't rot.
They have an idea, but it's based more on vibes than any objective criteria.
Uncanny that Orwell would list astrology, women, and dogs back to back to back. Man truly was a prophet.
He just knew...
@@captainweekend5276 that's because Orwell was middle management.. Its real
Soke things don't change they are just revealed.
What are you alluding to? That dog pill video Dev made some time ago?
orwell was a socialist
As Rick Sanchez would say, “I don’t care what makes you cry, I’ve seen what makes you cheer.”
Me: Please don't make Fascism Based
The Woke Agenda: Hold my locally grown, chemical free, organic, soy latte
local, chemical free and organic are all fasismus
I do not give a fuck anymore
@@woodwyrm that's fascist
Fascism is inherently based.
@@UnprofessionalProfessor Fascism will never be based, as it is the same shit the Left does: it's Socialism.
All forms of Socialism, which is a Gnostic Hegelian Cult, are the same: shit.
Like Vaush has said 1,000 times, it's all about "aesthetic". They know "fascist" carries the instant negativity and weight of the atrocities of the evil Nootzies and their leader Moustache Badman, and so by merely calling anyone or anything "fascist", they know all they are doing is smearing the thing with the _image_ of the ultimate badness. This is why the word has just become a buzzword-stand-in for generically "bad" to them. It's not some well-thought-out, historically accurate, brown shirts vs black shirts or Giovanni Gentile "third way" via syndicalism. There's no principle involved, no deep thinking, no logical or reasoned rationale toward some deep-seated ideology. It's just aesthetics, and, here, it's fairly safe to not overthink it, and just take their word for it.
It literally just everything I don't like is Nazi/Hitler. These people really aren't as intelligent as they they seem to think. They are the very definition of midwits.
modern leftism is all about esthetic
Vaush is way to open about how he believes the ends always justify the means and how lying/cheating to get to his utopia is a-ok. He is our dark triad plump boy.
"You're a fascist!"
"I'm more of a Goth, actually."
Interestingly, this suggests that leftists who cry "fascist" are very often not even trying to debate facts. They're just trying to make you look bad. They're trying to exert social power by casting you in a negative light. Isn't this the kind of thing they are supposed to be against? Yet from a cultural Marxist perspective it sort of makes sense why they do this. Things like logic and objectivity are part of the system that predominantly has power. So to be a good cultural Marxist, you can't use those.
2:12 "Liking dogs is fascist, you should save that love for your fellow humans instead"
Interesting. I wonder how an environmentalist would react to that sort of accusation.
Wait I just realized, would that statement, especially if expanded to all animals, apply to vegans?
So in your own terms, having pets is not projecting your brilliance on them and is not, in fact, a substitution for having children.
Calling everything evil Fascist also fallos out of Soviet Propaganda. The Soviets called the Axis powers Fascists blanketly because they didn't want to give the National Socialists of Germany the word Socialist, even with the "National" modifier. To call the National Socialists by their name would be hint there may be some connection between the two (which there is, they are basically cousin Ideologies). Using the Italian Fascist title instead added space from the Internationalist Marxist Socialism of the Soviets from the Ethno-Nationalist Socialism of Germany.
They literally are opposite ideologies but ok
@@jonatanedgren9522 Which are literally opposites. If it's any 2 of National Socialism, Fascism, and Marxist Socialism, then no, they are more alike than they are different.
The only way in which they could be called opposites are that National Socialism and Fascism are Nationalist while Marxist Socialism is Internationalist.
In every other way, they are more alike than different.
@@jakman2179 they are not tho. Natsoc rejects class struggle which is central to socialism/communism. The NSDAP worked with major industrialists in germany and oppressed unions, social democrats and communists.
When the NSDAP structured their economy they did it within the capitalist system. While also expanding the military and racial policies.
All of those are literally the opposite of for example the USSR. Which had a planned economy.
@@jonatanedgren9522
1. Reject class struggle. I never said they had class struggle like the Marxists. NatSocs were a dialectical next step after Marxism, and so had some differences in philosophy and justification for their actions. NatSocs replaced Class war with Race war. The only difference is that they called both Capitalism and Communism Jewish, and so hated both. Fascists got rid of class struggle entirely, trying to reach a new dialectic which would supersede the class war. Neither National Socialism nor Fascism is Marxist, Marxism is not all Socialism. All of these ideas are Socialist in that they seek Social (Group) control of the means of Production(Economy), the biggest difference is which group they think should be in charge and the details of how they exact control.
2. Worked with Major industrialists. No they didn't. They had exactly 1 industrialist who supported them directly, he ended up in a labor camp before the war was out. All the rest only started paying into his movement when he started looking like he might win. However, even with this, most of the money for Hitler's campaigns came from small donations, IE Workers and the Poor.
Once he came to power his men entered all the factories and took them over with very simple statements.
"You work for us now, do what we say or we will take your business from you."
Businesses were given a choice, "Obey or be Expropriated", why be surprised when most chose obedience over destitution and prosecution. The industrialists were complicit in many ways, but the vast majority did not happily go along with them, nor did they support him. They were forced to join the party or have their businesses nationalized. Not what I'd call a sign of "Industrialist Support".
3. Oppressed Unions. They did not Oppress unions, they nationalized it into their state. German Labor Front, was the union for everyone. It was very successful in both gathering and protecting workers. It was the largest Labor Union in the world. Additionally, it was not a sham to keep the workers down, but a cudgel against businesses. Of the hundreds of cases it oversaw between Owners and workers, only a scant handful ended in favor of the Owner, the vast majority were in favor of the Workers. So to claim they "Oppressed Labor Unions and Workers" is to ignore their methods.
It was so pro worker in fact that it basically subsidized everything they did, from putting food on the table and having babies to going on vacation.
A similar argument is typically pointed against the USSR, who abolished rather than nationalized the Unions, but if you claim to be a Worker's State, why do you need labor unions? You ARE the labor unions! The NatSocs thought Similarly.
4. In a Capitalist Mode. Except it really wasn't. The best description for it is a "Compulsory Economy". While the NatSocs didn't abolish private property and expropriate everything, they made it entirely contingent on obedience. On top of this, they had one of the most detailed economic organization schemes outside of the USSR. They had Price Commissars, Production Quotas, 4-year plans, strictly controlled imports and exports, and many more. It wasn't planned to the same degree or in the exact same way, but it was still a highly controlled and planned economy.
A business owner was owner in name only, he had no control and as such was little more than a glorified middle manager for the government. The Government dictated almost EVERYTHING about the businesses underneath them. Prices for products, Wages and Benefits, Prices for Captial and input goods (which also had to be requested from the government in the first place), hiring, firing, and even how much they were allowed to grow or spend. Most were forced to purchase government bonds. Stock exchanges disappeared and the few that survived basically did nothing.
If this is a "Capitalist Mode of Production" then I think your definition is meaningless.
5. Oppressed Communists and SocDems.
a) So did the USSR, they suppressed the less radical Socialists, so yes, very much like the USSR.
b) They converted most of them. Yes, sometimes by force, but few needed a threat to convert. There's a reason why they had the term "Beefsteak Nazi". He had a problem with members swapping back and forth between his party and the other two. The National Socialists were so similar to the Communists and SocDems in Germany before they rose to power that most didn't understand or see a difference. The fact that the NatSocs basically took the welfare state created by the SocDems then proceeded to both Racialize and VASTLY Expand it should be enough proof that they are more alike than different.
6. Expanded the Military. Just like the USSR was doing before and after the war. Stalin was expecting a war "Eventually" and so was preparing for it. Even after the war, he never really stopped expanding the military, all he did was slow down.
7. Racist policies. The USSR also had racist policies, typically against non-russians. Let's not forget the Holodomor, which was targeted against Ukrainians, the multiple mass relocations of "antiproletarian" populations (like the Cossacks), or the Jewish Plot.
So, opposites? No. Opposed? Yes. NatSocs and Fascists were Marxist Heretics. Not totally in agreement or Exactly the same, but more alike than different.
WTF
The Left: "Everything good and decent and moral is fascist!'
Me: "Okay. Guess they're the good guys, then."
“That’s not how this works!”
@@jmass4207 That's the point.
Being absurdly hyperbolic drives people away - potentially into the arms of your opponent. They stop listening to your arguments, even if some of then are actually rational.
Well, the point is more that if you find those things to be “good and decent and moral”, then you’re a fascist…
@@joelfennerRationality is Hardly a Leftist Value anyways. They call it white Supremacy.
They have spread the meaning of the word out so much that many things that the majority of people find 'good' are considered facist to them. They also use it to smear people who different opinions then them. So most people dont listen anymore when someone is called a facist. Its 'the boy who called wolf' in action.
I feel like a similar way to express this sentiment is the idea that your boos mean nothing because I’ve seen what makes you cheer
Everyday I awaken, I despise how such a self-righteous and cringe show could produce such a topical line.
the response "Me Ne Frego, Baizuo" needs to become a thing if only for its ability to trigger
damn, italian and chinese?
@@enraikow6109 yup but to translate them both "I don't give a Damn, White Left" just personifies my opinion of leftists
I dont think race has much to do with it. Theres two types of leftists, grifters of any race that just want to be fellow travellers, and yewish leftists who actually read theory and think leftism is a great way to achieve yewish supremacy
Real Facism is considering the State as some sort of deity worthy of faith and service.
Ur-bento Eco over here
"I don't want to argue the merit of my views. I want an 'I WIN' button!"
I make buttons, good idea 💡
As a fascist I must thank these people for making everyone think that everthing is fascist
Btw I’m joking
you're still bad bro
Joking? I don't know, humor is pretty fascist
@@TheGreenKnight500 don’t care
Honestly really refreshing, and gives me hope. They are driving more and more people to our cause. Our enemies are our best recruiters. Feminists are fascist, Hindus are fascist, Zionists are fascist, libertarians are fascists, eating meat is fascist, exercise is fascist, gay people who are monogamous and get married are fascist, dogs are fascist, anyone who is not a communist is a fascist. We're a big tent and everyone is welcome. Diversity is our strength. Many rods together are harder to break.
@@gascoigner Based
The further you push the pendulum to one side, the harder it's going to shift to the other side.
Cool we need to make our Homelands for their Native people again.
But the pendulum will always swing further into government control.
From the socialist side to the fascist side.
@@065Tim You got evidence for that?
@@065Tim i think, goverment control has its own pendulum. It always goes towards more control no matter who currently reigns until it fucks up a little to much and we do some frensh tradion called head off.
Honestly I don’t get the whole “libertarians hate the poor”. We don’t want to not help the poor but we bring up how inefficient government social services are and how the people can collectively come together and provide those services like fraternal or mutual aid societies was an important social service for many people when the government couldn’t provide it.
"Why don't you not want to hold people up at gunpoint to to then give that money to your friends who pocket almost all of it and end up leaving the poor in an even worse situation, do you hate the poor?"
@@FurlugeMost intelligent Liber-tard drone be like;
I always thought the libertarian stance was more based on the idea that with a completely free market, anyone who is desperate to escape poverty could with innovation and it’s the government and regulations that keep people down.
At least, that’s what I think it is. I don’t agree with it completely but I do think too many have a bad faith interpretation of Libertarianism.
@@rachelc.8143It's less about the innovation when it comes to the poor and more about the idea that government intervention overwhelmingly harms the disadvantaged. The libertarian stance regarding the poor is something like the poor would not be so poor if the rich stopped being able to use government as a weapon against them against them.
One of the reasons that it's not a particularly appealing philosophy is that that's a very passive kind of stance and it's really hard to sell passive political stances both to the government and to the people.
The best way to help a poor is to make it possible for them to get a stable job, and the best way to provide jobs is deregulation. Everything else is performative and enslaves the poor to the welfare state.
Fascism is when the population is fed. The more fed , the more fascist it is.
No you're thinking of the amount of K-On they watch
Extrapolated from the definition of communism as the complete opposite of fascism.
Does that make the populace morbidly oppressed?
That is a pretty stupid thing to say. It reminds me of feminists who say if you believe in equality between the genders you have to buy into all their bullshit as well.
"Facism is when something i dont like"
I was like, "oh I can see how something could make a bad faith loopy argument about why these things are fascist", until he said Thomas the Tank Engine. That broke me.
My husband and I have a game where we'll come up with the reason why a random thing is fascist/racist/sexist.
It's both hilarious and sobering.
And yeah, Thomas can easily be explained as all kinds of -ist; you could start by claiming that since steam powered the original industrial revolution, and with it European colonialism, steam engines are a symbol of a racist, sexist society.
@p.s.shnabel3409 The rivalry with diesel engines expressed in the show is clearly an allegory for conservative repression of societies advancement in all forms.
Thomas is just the manifestation of the old mantra that « at least under Mussolini the trains were on time », hence fascist 🤪
How about, a world where trains are sapient beings that must be made to serve the whims of white people. Never allowed to be anything else lest they be locked away in some garage or scrapped. Thus perpetuating a servant class for the sake of those to enjoy all the fruits of the trains' labor.
@@myriad9597 that rivalry was more closer to ethnic hatred
Vaush literally screaming fascism at Tirin’ Biden when he’s simply asking people not to attack each other or other peoples property is exactly how I imagined Vaush in my head, hyperbolically of course, but to see him actually do it has literally altered my brain chemistry.
I’d argue that modern communists and leftists WOULD be considered more fascist than actually communist.
Considering how many are just straight up tankies or campists, I can definitely see where you’re coming from.
Fascism is what happens when you remove the vague promises of equality from communism.
Even Lenin tried to make the Soviet union a total democracy.......he quickly learned that communism cant work though during the Civil war and copied the worst tendencies of the tsars. Soldiers without officers don't fight wars. Heirachy is inevitable
I’d argue that old leftists would be considered fascists by these kinds of leftists. If you were to bring a 1920s union man who sympathizes with the likes of Lenin and Marx he’d be at best labeled a patsoc and at worst called a fascist.
@therealspeedwagon1451 this is true, because they valued labor, strength, masculinity, hard work, and sacrifice. Hell Stalin,Lennin, and guvera would be considered fascists If they appeared today with different names.
The only thing that separates freedom from hedonism is responsibility, therefore when you idealize hedonism as freedom, anything and everything that impedes your most debased desires becomes tyranny and thus "fascism" in the most colloquial sense of the term (tyranny), even to the point where opposing tyranny or actual fascism itself becomes "fascist" since it's all based on desire and objectives and not truth or reason.
Well put. I screenshot your comment, i found it very insightful. Thanks.
Finally I see someone else who knows their definition of freedom is hedonism.
I would like to add to my previous statement and make a warning: Know and understand that one aspect of the nature of evil is very much the same as that of the ever adaptation of diseases, for just as surely as a disease can mutate and change itself that your body can longer recognize and/or fight it off despite the fact that it's still the same disease despite its changes, just is the case for what is truly evil as it concerns your hearts and minds as individuals and as a society. For although a disease will always be a disease no matter how it changes itself and how it shall always be not only *a* disease but also that same particular disease that it was and shall always be upon its inception, every chessboard has enough room to present two opposing sides who present themselves as black and white even though they are but the same pieces who make the same moves and do the same things, and are defined by the same, singular chessboard, the same foundation, to further express this issue let me say this also: present a man a false solution and he will walk but one way of folly, present a man a problem (such as the recognition of a false way) and a thousand men shall walk a hundred thousand different ways of folly for every one man who finds the answer. Or in other words: Wide is the path to destruction and narrow is the path to avoid it, and few find it.
That being said I will say in regards to understanding a problem that if a man can not sustain himself by merely pondering how the bread in his hand can sustain his body, and that he must partake of and eat it to sustain himself, how much more so is that the case when he does not even ponder the bread in his hand but rather his own starvation, that he would forget the bread in his hand for his starvation? In other words: it is not enough to know and understand the problem alone, you must have the answer, and it is not enough to have the answer you must partake of it as well and fully commit to it just as the bread a man eats builds his own body, as being consumed by problem within your thoughts can become a problem in and of itself if left unanswered, such is the relationship of men who recognize the problems of current society and recognize the solutions and value Christianity offers for that problem yet does not follow the logical conclusion of that and fully commit to it instead being neither hot, nor cold but lukewarm instead, for certainly cold water or hot tea is better than lukewarm water because the cold masks the impurities that they might be passed over more easily but the lukewarm and hot highlights impurities so that they are brought to attention instead.
Thankyou for your many sacrifices Dev, if i had to watch Vaush as much as you do, i would be a red stain on the ceiling. I truely envy your strength.
not cleaning up that stain afterwards is peak fascism in my not so humble opinion.
The quick answer is that they have no idea what fascism is, only that it is bad.
And everything they even midly dislike is bad
Well, it is. Thanks for playing
"Facism is when defense budget."
"Fascism is when defense"
I have absolutely embraced Me Ne Frego. Hate me and see if I mind. I have enemies? Good, that means that I stand for something. Their boos mean nothing, I know what they cheer for.
The problem with having enemies is that it means you weren't thorough enough.
"Their boos mean nothing, I know what they cheer for" is a metal af line, I'm stealing that
Can’t remember the quote verbatim but something this reminds me of is “you don’t do anything worth doing without making people mad”
I think the existence of Fascism and Communism/Socialism disproved the left-right political spectrum.
Wait until you realize fascists and Nazis are far left too.
Calling national (race) socialism right wing because they fought the communists (class socialism) is like calling the Crips law abiding because they wear blue and fight the Bloods.
They are not necessarily opposing concepts and it was the left's biggest propaganda win (after WWII) to stick only the right with the association.
Mr. Mustache-Man was a socialist. When on the campaign trail, he specifically tried to win voters over with promises of left-wing policies (such as a right to employment, housing, welfare ...) and he actually did follow through with some of that (*if* you were the right kind of German).
He was also a fascist.
You can be both at the same time.
Fascism is socialism in decay.
Nah, the Left-Right spectrum exists, but not in the Auto/Lib Left/Right concocted by Marxists people think.
The reality is more Collectivist/Individualist, Centrally Planned Economy / Free Market Economy, Statism(Totalitarianism) / Minarchism(Anarchism); respectively.
With this spectrum you can see that Socialist regimes, which are all collectivist centrally planned dictatorships (or overbearing and bureucratic fiscal hellholes maskerading as "democracies") all fall into the same area: the Left, where it belongs.
Because they don't know what Fascism is and stupidly believe Umberto Ecco's "definition" of Fascism (in which he declared Fascism is just another word for nationalism or authoritarianism).
It's sad how dumb these NPCs are.
The more the word _Fascist_ gets diluted, the less people will care when they hear it.
In a world where global politics have slowly begun to shift more to the 'right', _THAT_ is troubling.
Being labeled a fascist by the bright-bulbs on the left would be much more meaningful if they could tell you who the intellectual father of fascism is. I'd even take a name of one of his influences. But, at least they know who Marx is, even if, as Aurelius said, the opinions of 10,000 are of no matter if they don't know what they're talking about. Or words to that effect...
Do you think Engels is ever like "That mfer Marx getting all the credit"?
@@spsawyer22 I do.
National socialism was created after WWI failed to become the world wide workers revolution that marxist philosophers had predicted. Instead poor English and poor French soldiers killed poor German soldiers, and poor German soldiers killed poor English and French soldiers. What they thought would happen is the poor soldiers would join forces and overthrowing their bourgeois masters.
The fact that the intellectual father of fascism (I assume you're talking about Mussolini but obviously you could make arguments for Giovanni Gentile) was formerly a socialist is never discussed but it makes all the sense in the world.
Both Communism and Fascism are authoritarian systems with centrally planned economies, along with no freedom of the press, assembly, or speech. Both discourage and ultimately discredit religion, will only support the family if it suits their purposes (Communists discredit it, while Facists only support it for their racial or ethnic superiority purposes), and have to rely on painting anyone who disagrees as "the enemy" to even survive, which always devolves into either warmongering or mass purges and famine.
Fascism is not "right" anymore than Communism is "left". The only difference between the two is the organizational principle. Fascists justify their regime through the forcing of unity through nationality or race, while Communists force unity through adherence to the state in a perverted sense of all comrades being equal. Both end up in the same place.
The true opposite number of both of these ideologies would be Anarcho-Capitalism, a state in which the power of government is reduced to the point of ineffectiveness, and thus becomes useless while private entities then fill the power vacuum.
Marcus Aurelius' Meditations are fantastic and should definitely be quoted more. Imagine if people were taught the following for example: "It is in our power to have no opinion about a thing, and not to be disturbed in our soul; for things themselves have no natural power to form our judgments. " Meditations, book 6, number 52.
"The Yahzees have been pegged as the most evil." Pol Pot has entered the chat.
I'd have to agree. Wiping out your own people is more evil than wiping out a different people.
Yep. But he's talking about the commonly-held perception of the world.
Frankly, human history is full of equally disturbing events. If I could go back in time once and change *one* single event, WWII wouldn't even be in my top ten list.
@@p.s.shnabel3409 For me, it's the French Revolution.
@@pocketmarmotsI can't think of a better answer than that one.
There's a guy called mantiswave here on youtube, and I think he coined the word "halfwit" which is a person who is just smart enough to realise that calling people you disagree with evil isn't what a smart person does, but isn't smart enough to realise that they just replaced evil with fascist.
Reminds me of "Jolly Heretic" who spits the same BS.
A scholar cannot be fascist and so vice versa.
He probably said "Midwit" and it started with Vox Day.
MentisWave once complained about how leftists cartoons dehumanize the Right (like political cartoons on all sides often do), then proceeded to show a disfigured brainless inhuman soyjak to portray the Left like. Don't listen to that idiot hypocrite.
Vaush is my moral compass. Everything he stands for is good and reasonable when flipped 180 degrees.
So what is going to be called fascist next? Penguins? The sun? Breathing? Aglets?
Penguins: rigid body posture and often strict adherence to gender roles in their relationships
Sun: is selectively scorching hot in countries inhabited by POC while showing a much more reasonable face for the Western world
Breathing: done by white people, obviously fascist in nature ... duh; it enables them to live longer and oppress POC
Aglets: while shoe laces are already problematic in the way they are reminiscent of nooses, adding a capping material to further strengthen this unholy alliance is downright evil
... and I'm not even trying ...
Aglets form a bundle of fibres, and sticks are just many fibres, therefor aglets are a bundle of sticks, thus fascist.
@@Otori6386no, they're f****ts!
No it has to be objectively good things. Bathing, chewing your food, putting the grocery cart away. All of those are fascist.
@@Joutube_is_trash "Hey man, thinking badly of me just because I'm too lazy to put the shopping cart back makes you a fascist, man."
My sister is a fascist, she designs clothing!
The horror!
Considering she is perpetuating colonialist concepts of beauty and modesty, I am amazed you're still willing to call her family.
;)
Is she single?
@@LagrangePoint0 nah, she’s married to some dude she called Adrian or Aryan or something idk
@@doctorgrubious7725 Well, being in a monogamous relationship is fascist so.... give me her @
Does she work for Hugo Boss?
LoL "I've seen what makes you cheer! Your 'boos' mean nothing!"
Being judged as immoral by those who define themselves by their immorality should be taken as virtuous. I'm _glad_ to be called evil because I disagree with evil people. Because they're jerks. I _want_ to disagree with jerks.
Im just waiting for the full swing when they declare atheism fascist
Surely they couldn’t?
I suppose it could be seen that way.
1980s christifash: no video games because Satanism!
2020s SJW athiest: no video games because sexism and mu soggy knees!
I just have a simple view. Control freaks can go screw off.
The same reason they use 'bigot' incorrectly yet they are so wedded to their views they can't even imagine something which could change their minds.
They’re also ignorant beyond repair. Like most bigots.
a bigot is someone who cannot accept another opposing opinion. Sounds like your typical leftist to me
Hell for socialists is being constantly told 'Me Ne Frego'! Lets make it that way!
To some, apathy is death. To others it's a genocide.
Inverno is the Latin word for winter. Get educated (Save yourself).
@@Shut.Eye.Cinema Me ne frego.
Libertarian here. I don't see everyone else as collectivists, and nor does any other libertarian I know of. We view leftists as collectivists, but moderates and such aren't particularly collectivist.
If you don’t your misinformed. Conservatives are collectivists on social issues wanting to force their morality onto others like drug laws.
Not to mention, we tend not to confuse Rousseau with liberalism, as he is not and has never been one. It's disappointing that so many self identified liberals like dev don't see this distinction and have to qualify their own belief system as a result
I seriously just switched from Starship Troopers on Netflix to this.
Fuck the bugs. Mini alfredo.
Would be hard for them to use their old favorite "natsee" with what's going on at the schools
But really, they use the word "fasc!sm" for the same reasons why a kid will throw a screaming fit in the candy aisle at the store -- it gets them what they want
"Demons don't have mothers. Why call out for a mother you've never had?"
"Because when I make that sound, humans stop attacking. It's like a magic spell."
@@scienceface8884
"Even the Townsfolk who hate us look upon me as a person, even as they tremble in fear. But you look at me as though I'm a wild beast."
"Aren't you? You demons are wild beasts who imitate human speech but can't be communicated with."
Oh no, don't worry, they already figured it out. NOT wanting Jews exterminated is Nazism. And in a few months or years, they'll have forgiven themselves for their antisemitism and don't understand why you're bringing it up and your scurrilous attempt to bring it up is itself Nazism. Hell, some of them are already forgiving themselves for their antisemitism as we speak.
me ne frego
Based
Haha I dropped me ne frego at work during our mandatory DEI Training, and the only person to get it was the old Italian man, who gave me a long look before showing me his Christian tattoos at lunch lol
I really do not give a fuck about Progressive morality, I just want to play video games and watch movies without being told I'm a bad person, just leave me alone.
Okay fascist.
If you keep being told that you are a bad person, then maybe you are?
Or maybe you aren’t _actually_ being told that, and you just have a persecution complex?
@@Markunator Contempt from you is high praise.
@@lordpisces5019 Sorry, but when did I use the word “contempt”, exactly? And even if I did, how would contempt from me be “high praise”? Please, elaborate!
@@Markunator You identified with the people calling him a bad person. Calling someone a bad person indicates contempt.
By context, you identify with a faction of egotists who wish to destroy all that is good and replace it with their mad delusions. Thus, being viewed as evil by you indicates we are opposing such a faction, which is high praise.
finishing the trucker video is fascist. this must be why dev wont do it.
We're at the "I don't care" part of the Joker movie. Now it's going to the "You get what you deserve" part, with the Left being DeNiro.
"When everyone is fascist, NO ONE WILL BE!!"
I guess I'm one because I grew up on Thomas the Tank Engine and Attack on Titan is my favorite anime.
Shingeki no kyojin is not fascist.
@@Shut.Eye.Cinema Progressives say it is. I know, they're stupid.
@@Shut.Eye.Cinema Progressives say it is. Of course I don't care what they have to say about anything.
@@AOT_HxH95 how imPORTant your opinion
Treating fascists like they're the bad guys in a poorly-written action movie is why nobody can talk about it intelligently. Because like it or not, fascism is a legitimate political system that was loved by millions of people who lived under it.
But as the 20th century showed, fascism is the single most potent threat to the current world order, i.e. "the tribe." And because "the tribe" runs every aspect of our society, we are supposed to believe that fascists are inhuman monsters from another dimension who want to spread pain and suffering purely for the sake of being as evil as possible. The collective Hollywood brain rot that we've all been subjected to will not allow us to see fascists as regular people who have become fed up with the destruction of our civilization and want to do something about it.
I dunno starting a second world war in europe and killing millions of people seems kinda evil
Patriarchy is political mythology.
The rule of fathers is no myth. Dad-ism is quite real.
in USA yes, but in afghanistan, not so sure.
@@enraikow6109 I'd agree with that.
@@enraikow6109 in any non-western country to be honest. Most of the world is way more conservative than the west
@@fantasypvpwest is probably a lot more than the gov or m s m would care to believe.
The thing binding Libertarians is not "rugged individualism." That's a smear thrown at Libertarians (mostly) by Neocons who want to malign the ideology. In a private law society, interpersonal relationships and fraternity would need to be far more important than they are now to make up for the lack of social programs. That is and always has been the Libertarian position. If you want to reject the legitimacy of that argument, then okay, but Individualism and liberty are not the same thing. They can exist both together and separately, making them semantically exclusive.
Interesting point. To me they are one and the same. I am kind of stuck trying to separate them. Freedom of sppech and expression, freedom of religion, minimal government. Everything is about autonomy of consent. Conservatives are a form of collectivism as the neocons rope the citizens into wars they don't agree with. The collectivism of the left is obvious since it is nothing but yielding autonomy to the state, especially against other people's will ( which is why leftists don't understand why actual liberals don't budge, morality has nothing to do with it) So how can you be individualistic or libertarian outside that parameter?
@@Nylon_riot Libertarianism has two acceptable definitions in my mind. The mainstream definition is essentially "less government, more autonomy" whereas the Rothbardian definition is driving towards a free society. Free from what? Coercion. This is where the difference lies. Individuals can coerce one another and groups can exist without engaging in coercion relative to one another, and vice versa. So, the presence of Individualism is quite literally non-essential to the Rothbardian definition.
The real issue, then, is that people see Libertarianism the way they see political parties, so they use the first definition, looking to group as many people who use the word as they can. The issue with this is that "Libertarian" is not a political group. The Libertarian Party is, but Libertarianism itself is an ideology, a set of values.
As an AnCap, its all about consent to me.
The mere existence of groups doesn't go against individualism either. It's just that collectivism is always coercive, so liberty and individualism go hand in hand.
Libertarians in a nutshell, "Hey, I like libraries too, I just don't think you should be holding people up at gunpoint to build one."
Because it’s the only thing that helps them still feel like they’re “counter culture” (aka relevant).
If everything is fascist except them, then they’re always punching up, and “fighting the man”. So stunning, so brave.
So basically to a socialist a principled liberal is a socialist.
If a liberal resist socialism that means they are either not principled, or they are not a real liberal, and therefore they are the only other option which is fascist.
Where does monarchism fit in this then?
With this type of of mentality, its mirror nazi too, why you hate german people? If you are good german people you will support nazi hitler if not then you are communist and go to gas camp
Left didnt even realise that they shared the same mentality
Nobody on the left thinks liberals are socialist. In fact they are worse than most on the right. You ever heard what Malcom X said about liberals?
Liberals in the US since are center right. Our Overton window is pretty broken. Socialists are more like free market libertarians.
Communists are more the dreamers. We understand there is abundant resources on this planet. If a free market is the way to get to the Startrek future, we are all for it. We are just open to other ways also.
It fits up your ass with the rest of the nonces that fancy themselves nobility
Ive been repearedly told when I say something is a monarchy not fascist that monarchies are just proto fascists and if you replace the king with a dictator its just a fascist state.
That shows how little they understand the power systems in old monarchies but to them monarchs are just fascist dictators with extra steps.
What the fuck? Man, I'll never be not astounded at the amount of people can't distinguish, between leftist, liberal and even sometimes socialist.
Dev describing Second Thought
And this is exactly why they disliked Pepe so much. He is the personification of the me ne frego sentiment.
no they hate pepe because it was co opted
and used as symbol of alt right
@@seckno lol thats only what the media says. The only people that actually believe that are the midwit types that watch msnbc and cnn unquestioningly. The fact of the matter is, its a meme that is used by people all over the political spectrum. Its only an alt-right symbol if you want it to be.
Normal person: "Threatening people isn't peaceful"
Vaush: "This is unironically fascistic"
I'm pretty sure my landlord over heard me having a conversation criticizing DEI and then I got evicted. She works in HR. It's only speculation but it was after 8 years and for no reason
That sucks and is totally illegal
Landlords do not exist in nature
@@Shut.Eye.Cinema Tell that to a bear what's claimed a patch of forest as territory.
Get back to us with the results.
@@TheZombieburner YOU MIGHT WANT TO PRACTICE YOUR SOCIAL SKILLS SOME FURTHER
@@TheZombieburner So it is predatory and unhuman
Iron Law of Woke Projection. Easy. Next question!
Every villain is the hero of their own story
More or less, they want to have a monopoly on "good", and they believe their own values (as inconsistent as they can be) as inherently correct, so anything not under their control must then be "evil".
Youre saying "Fascist" like its a bad thing at this point. Now no one knows what a true Fascist is anymore. Now all of these things you have listed look REALLY GOOD.
Homogenus societies.
Rule of law
Interest free banking
A culture that isn't masochistic and xenophilic.
How are any of these bad?
because the actual fascist societies in history have resulted in failure, see Italy or Francois Spain along with every single fascist regime in Latin America
@@constantinethecataphract5949 they aren’t but Fascism makes those things impossible by it’s all within the state ordeal, you cannot have a Homogenous society when you are in fear of being snitched on by your neighbors for wrongthink, to the Fascist there is no rule of law, simply the authority of the state, Gentile laid this out in his writings, the law on paper itself has no use and will be circumvented if needed, a culture that isn’t masochistic is easily replicable in Liberal societies as well, and isn’t exclusive to fascism
I think you misunderstood what it means. The law written on paper doesnt have any power in *any* society, unless it is held sacred by those with the power to enforce it. Thats not unique to fascist states, anyone who ever interacted with cops knows this from experience.
@@constantinethecataphract5949 It's what they imply. Listing all the good things - how is that different from all the comments here "they only know its bad"
I think it’s awesome that Vaush is getting people less-excited about Biden.
Dunno about that. Next thing you know, they'll go haring off doing something even more stupid. If you think that's not possible, think again.
Give him a month or so before November and he'll be head cheerleader for Team Biden just like he and the rest of lefty UA-cam were in 2020. Remember: Existential crisis.
"The fascists of the future will call themselves anti-fascists."
Mic drop!
Everything I don't like is fascism. We heard that before here in Spain.
you are to take part in forever lasting, collective pain and guilt, if you do not, you are suspicious.
Make "Me Ne Frego" Cool Again
Literally anything you call that is a defined structure or system that exists is fascist to these peoples.
Harm reduction politics video when? those are pure stupid ideas that came from child like thoughts like "even if I tell you its wrong, you will still do it. So do evil in safety"
Harm reduction is just enabling but with extra steps
During my middle school days, a very defining moment for my development as a person was when my class had a meeting about what we should do for an upcoming event. It was a class of thirty or so tweens, myself included, but only a few had an idea of what we should do for the event. I'm not sure why, but I vaguely remember that I tried to say something, and before I could say anything a girl loudly told me "Frank, no one cares, shut up."
I was the quiet kid... I'd been jerked around before... But I think it was being told, flat out, that, hey, "nobody cares about you" that made me understand a bit about how things work, and to be honest I kinda have to respect that girl who let me see that at a pretty early age. People don't and they don't have to care about certain things.
Of course, that's now. Back then I remember feeling kind of hurt. I'd just been trying to contribute, after all. Made me feel alienated from my class. But I think that was honestly for the best given how many problems my class would get into while I was able to opt out since I wasn't really "in" with them. But imagine if I'd gotten angry at the girl right there, or more upset and caused some problems to have my voice heard... maybe I'd get my voice heard, but then what? It'd only been by adding problems.
I think socialists can't really comprehend that people not caring about every single one of their points shows how childish they are. Instead of being their own person, they *need* society to effectively affirm that they're correct and good and righteous. They're kids that want to come off as the smart contributors without the effort, and instead of realizing that people won't care about that if you're bothering them, they don't learn to leave people alone, they intend to double down.
Anyway, that's me rambling before going to bed...
you should have stood up for yourself
@@gplastic Maybe, but... it was middle school. Not the most important part of growing up...
Frank, you have made an excellent point and expressed it well. That class missed out on your contribution and it sounds like they missed out as a result.
Bad for them. If you base decisions on who is the most spiteful, you will not get good leadership.
I appreciate your insight, but saying that being ostracised was for the best and that you shouldn't have been hurt by it is a bit of cope. Bad things can (and often do) happen in a way that doesn't allow to extract anything good out of it, and that's ok too.
You’re such a fucking pussy. You should have yelled at that bitch.
Apathy is still an effective rejection of control
but apathy is death
running away from Discipline is pretty much the cornerstone of every single political ideology popular nowdays
My favorite is, "So what?"
Simple: they can't define it... but need something to call the opposition they don't understand.
"Everyone I don't like is "insert whatever buzz word reddit is using that week" "
It's all so tiring ...
A nation of cowards and fools can not escape domination
The people who know what fascism is never use the word and the people that don't know fascism use it as if it was their first word.
Oh I like maxioms too
The first thing I ever studied intensely was the history of Nazi Germany. This was around 2007. As a result, I kinda' freaked out every time I heard a politician preaching ANYTHING that the mustache man said. ...and OMG did I freak out over Obama's first presidential campaign!
Honestly, Obama said some scary stuff. I mean, he called for a youth brigade as well funded as the military! But no supporter of Obama listened to my warnings. I understand why. I came off like kind of a spaz.
Now I have a little bit more perspective, and so I bite my tongue and I choose my battles strategically. And I don't throw the word "fascist" around anymore. But I still THINK it, in a loose sense of the word.
Boomer who just wants to grill: "me ne frego"
"OMG FACIST!"
"I just want to grill," the modern "me ne frego."
They don't! They also use "racist, sexist, homophobic, Nazi, denier, . . . "
If everything is fascism, does that mean "calling everything fascist" is fascist onto itself?
If you have an IQ different from zero, does that mean you invented the test?
Fascism is when something i dont like
Wait, since when did we start caring about what pedos think?
Well, looks like I've been menefregging for some time now, and slowly, but increasigly, I can be more open about it. I find it truly hilarious when somebody drops the racist accusation as if its some argument finisher. Once you go "and?" they have nowhere to go.
This is the best answer… It’s even better when you suggest they revealed their true colours when they decided to shape their entire opinion about you based on a single label (racist thinking) and that they ignored your humanity on the basis of one thought.
Shorter: it's the moral cudgel fallacy.
"Agree with me or you're evil!
"No, you suck and so do your ideas."
"YOU'RE EVIL!"
It's their thesaurus word for "bad"
well it is, so where's the counter argument?
@@Shut.Eye.Cinema A counter argument isn't necessary. it's unintelligible to use it for everything. Like, wtf are you talking about?
@@joemayo1589 In what I'm talking about, beyond the realm of such concepts as "holy" and "unholy" - in good and bad, see,
we can use the scientific method.
And the definition of Communism is "society based in the scientific method".
So you can spin it however you want and learn and study. But the opposite of scientific would be fascist. And thus BAD.
@@Shut.Eye.Cinema lol no. Nothing you said is true, at all. Not even close.
You're clearly a young person with very little real world experience or factual education.
@@Shut.Eye.Cinema But i will tell you this: you're on the correct path, trying to have discussions with people that will challenge you.
I remember when UA-cam leftoids where trying to cast RetroWave music as fascistic, because it was inherently melancholic of the past and because EdgySphinx listened to it on his streams. Luckily, it became too popular.
Brilliant essay. Thank you, SFO!
Well considered and explained. Keep up the good work!