The Feminization of Politics, or, Why Democracy SUCKS | with Aydin Paladin, Kingmaker
Вставка
- Опубліковано 1 бер 2024
- Aydin is a gamer-both in the political game theory and the tabletop rpg sense of the word. In this calmvo we discuss the feminization of american politics and why monarchy is her preferred form of government.
/ aydinpaladin
/ aydinpaladin
Support this channel:
www.paypal.me/benjaminboyce
cash.app/$benjaminaboyce
www.buymeacoffee.com/benjamin...
Find all interviews on spotify: spoti.fi/3px5WnK
/ benjaminboyce
Join me on alternative video sites:
odysee.com/@BenjaminABoyce
www.bitchute.com/channel/benj...
rumble.com/user/BenjaminABoyce
And on Twitter @BenjaminABoyce
Even Forrest Gump wound up with more responsibilities at the end of his movie than any female superhero.
Switzerland is NOT a constitutional monarchy. Aydin probably confused neighbouring Liechtenstein wich shares defence and energy supply with Switzerland but otherwise is a sovereign nation.
Yes, this one is a head-scratcher. I can find no evidence that Switzerland has been under any form of monarchic rule since the 13th century. She clearly misspoke, but what's interesting is that Switzerland is a glaring example of how a country can thrive under SMALL, LOCAL democratic rule and a dedication to relative social conservatism, along with fierce independence and neutrality regarding foreign disputes. THIS is the answer to our problems, NOT having members of the Clinton or Bush families as our monarchs in perpetuity. I understand why modern right-wing intellectuals are eager to change the status quo, but rejecting the principles of our Founding Fathers is NOT the answer...
And Hegel was a monarchist... Pretty meh reflections on it too
@@gdonegan03237 It was until 1648, and no switzerland and democracy is not a solution, switzerland ihas been ruled by wealthy aristocratic families and only has been allowed to remain a country do to being surrounded by high mountains and working as a buffer state.
Total Liberalism eradication.
@@gdonegan03237 its gone and you are being replaced, its already gone, the only truth is power, your concepts wont save you
I think it was James Lindsey who said men generally want what is true, while women want what is morally desirable. The feminization of the education and psychology fields has been a disaster.
Per Kohlberg's stages of moral development, women stall out at stage 3 (morality by social consensus) at about the age of 13 and stay there until anywhere from their mid 30s to the rest of their lives.
@@randacnam7321 that study was flawed. To reach level 5 you had to willing to do things like being loyal to the greater society over your kin.
Level 4 and 5 people were a bunch of rats
thats interesting coz women also expect truth from men so how does it work among women. academic world and work hasnt changed but how people use knowledge.
@@ItsMe-sg5owlevel 5 sounds like communism where they rat out family members for glorious leader.
Women have no morals. They just submit to the flock, and whatever the flock wants is considered moral. Why is it that men always try to paint womens' flaws as some sort of virtue?
Allowing women to vote means that politicians have to appeal to them. There is nothing stupider than a man trying to impress a woman.
Right. Young men in particular do stupid and dangerous things to impress women.
I always tried to put it more logically, but that just drives the point home in a simple way anyone can understand.
@@techpriest6962humility is the first step to greatness. Keep going forward king 👑
It allows up down simping. Virtue signalling. Idealistic speeches.
Wow my comment was hidden. Can anyone see it?
Good to see her face this time. Since she appeared on Timcast shes been more confident about putting it out there.
Prob cause she’s out of academia and the country
She's received comments on her videos that her voice is an AI, as well.
Rather than explain it solely as it's a 'broadcast' delivery, and maybe to give herself the confidence boost, she's been doing segments with her face.
She is on camera on Thursdays for Geeks and Gamers Tabletop
@@lynngreen7978 my point was it took her a long time to even get on camera. I've been watching her content for a few years now.
@@hengineerSorry, I've been charged with trying to hep the channel grow, and shameless promotion is a habit now. 😀
Holy blap! Ayden Paladin on Calmersations! Always a guaranteed good time!
Look around. Monarchy around the world has evaporated and democracies have been installed for the past century. If this is what democracy has given us, what good is it?
'Judge by the fruit'
I don’t think that our current democratic systems are actually democratic. They are merely monarchies with extra steps.
but I don't want monarchy , republicanism , liberalism , democracy , communism etc , I want my own specific way to be homosexual biological male separately and even single yet to have everything I decide
"And how's that working out for you, democracies?"
nothing but an attempt by monarchies to religitimize themselves after destabilizing other countries attempts at self-governance
Awesome conversation Ayden and Ben, thanks for the honest engagement.
Been impressed with Aydin Paladin since bloodsports, which she was clearly too classy for. Back then we were both atheists and now we both are not. I had no idea about her brush with death and am very glad she came out of it.
Simp
This whole bloodsports thing was just "mean girls" pretending to be fightclub.
Monarchies always had some sort of power struggles. No matter how you organize humanity, there will always be those who are ambitious, who seek power, influence, wealth, and the like. Potential heirs who compete to be the king, powerful churchmen who become puppet masters, court eunuchs who manipulate the heir, generals who become warlords, and a host of other possibilities. Just look back at world history. Monarchies arose in a time when military power was synonymous with political power. Roman legions could make or break an emperor. What do we do about the praetorian class, the ones who have the big bad weapons and the authority to use or misuse them? And the new intelligence state, the J.Edgar Hoovers, the spies and covert operatives have, if anything, grown in power. If one throne, one "neck" holds all the power, holding on to that power becomes an imperative, and the lengths one may go to to do so can be horrifying. And the more absolute the power the head of state holds, the greater the temptation to overthrow and replace him.
How is that any different to the current state of POTUS? The last two cycles have proven that the head of state is not even CLOSE to holding true executive power.
Traditionally, kings have had a close link to the military and have often served with them. Generals and Admirals are appointed by the King, who is also head of the armed forces.
The issue you have pointed out is common to *all* forms of government. The definition of a government is to have a monopoly on force to compel action.
Are things any better in the USA now? At least under the system that Ayden has proposed the royal family has their incentives aligned with the nation. "I want an efficient, obedient military because they serve me and I work to maximize the value of the people; who are in a very real way are my property."
Right now the USA has the most corrupt President of all time being run by the Military Industrial Complex to siphon off tax payer funds (into the future, through debt) into a giant money-laundering scheme.
Choose your poison.
It is impossible to vote for leaders and that is why you don't have them. A clever eunuch would be far better than what you have now
It really just sounds like you fear competence combined with a misunderstanding of how leaders are held accountable. No person is more accountable than a monarch.
@@davidjohnson-tq4qxFear? I am wary of any and all forms of government, as virtually all that have existed so far have in some way become either corrupt or have perpetrated violence and destruction upon some segment of their own population. My point is to note that there are no more perfect forms of governance, nor are any governments immune from human folly and evil.
Tell Genghis Khan all about accountability.
Switzerland is not a monarchy.
I think she was thinking of Liechtenstein. Just giving her the benefit of the doubt.
Interesting conversation. Had never heard of Aydin before, just subscribed to her channel.
Her back catalogue of content is very good.
Very thoroughly researched and well presented.
She makes evergreen content (not the school like Benjamin, well at least not in the way that I meant)
Paladin seems a decent person and I agree with her overall philosophy. She did get it wrong with conservatives being more individualistic, though. Conservatives are group orientated and the bang opposite of individualistic. She's mixed up classical liberals with conservatives because, today, both fall on the right side of politics, but they are not the same. Also, traditionally, women upheld conservative values -due to families being more important to females- more than men, who were the ones pushing for more liberalism.
It was once women came on board with liberalism that their empathetic and nurturing nature becomes pathologized in a society that gives women more power and influence in our institutions. The pathology has led to helping the underdog, no matter what, which is why we have millions of economic migrants, higher welfare burdens on the tax payer and stupid things like rapists and murderers getting lenient sentences.
Liberalism and pathologized female traits are the bane of the west.
As an old man whose time has come and gone I say, your world, your battles to fight. I salute the quality of you, the warriors fighting it. I sleep well at night knowing the future is in your hands.
Dont give her alcohol and ask her to speak japanese please, you will regret😅
υωυ
Thank you Benjamin! Aydin is awesome. Many challenging topics to sort through...
The American Revolution was ignited because the British Regulars tried to disarm the British Colonists after years of arguing over a lack of proper representation of the people's interests in the British Parliament, "tea" is common associated as the simplistic reason because "muh ignant 'Mericans" is a fun trope across the pond. The Tea tossed was actually stale tea not generally fit for normal consumption and was emblematic of how Britain was treating the Colonies as a dumping ground for extra labor and poor products.
America was also Never supposed to be this multi-racial, multi-national, multi-ethnic, multi-cultural mess that it is today that was all an invention of the 20th century to propagandize Americans into being intrinsically accepting of foreigners by convincing us that we were ALL foreigners dissociated from our proper home countries. It's as unwanted as the original American distaste for slavery imported by the British as they deemed "British air too fit for a slave to breath" so it got exported elsewhere to the colonies.
Top comment my man! Absolutely spot on.
Absolute monarchy has *some* pros as mentioned in this video. It also has some significant cons such as when you get someone who is actively malignant (i.e. a tyrant) or who is malleable and usable by others. Believe me, we in England (prior to parliament) have had both and it's been very bad when either happens.
Yes. It doesn’t matter what form of government we have. What matters is morals. The ruling class has to be held to a strong code of morals. Arguing over which type of government works is pointless. Morality is the highest priority.
For what it's worth, that's essentially what we have now in both the UK & USA. "Absolute Bureaucracy" in the sense of "rule by (unelected) bureaucrats." There's really little difference between that and a powerful monarchy, with the main difference being that it's harder to pin down who to blame for the actions of the government.
After all, in a non-figurehead monarchy, there's one most obvious person to blame whenever things go wrong.
Will that fix all of society's ills? Absolutely not. Will it improve things? Most likely, at least to some degree.
One thing I worry about is in countries, states, cities in decline, most people don't want to deal with the stress of being held responsible for failures that may actually be out of your control. So the only people who seek office are dunces and corrupt sociopaths, as well as leaders who are understandably paranoid about being blamed for the things out of their control, and therefore driven to tyranny ala Hamlet.
Aydin is amazing, always love seeing her on here!
Interesting discussion About the idea of adopting monarchy instead of democratic Republic. The main problem I see is that this assumes that the ruler is fit to rule. Many are not.
It is only possible as a monarchy to have a leader who is fit to rule. It is impossible to vote for leaders and that why you don't have one.
Great conversation, Aydin is always worth a listen, but I think she omitted by far the strongest argument for monarchy which is the necessity of the embodiement of sovereignty. It is the disembodiement of sovereignty under democracy that is driving our societal dysgenisis. Monarchy is necessary but not sufficient if we are to not collapse entirely.
Loved the chat. Ty.
There is a guy in Matt Christiansen's chat who is VERY much on the side of considering a monarchy, as well. He has plans to make a video series on it, so I keep prompting him to do it.
Blonde has talked quite bit in the past about her preference of a Monarchy. It's very compelling when laid out properly. Also, Hey Kitty!
@@pablowentscobar .. Pablo, mien freund.. good to see you in The Leslie of Reason and Boyce of Mansplaining Podcast. As a reward for your excellent taste in creators, The Kitty has reserved for you a SPECIAL [hidden for now] BONK for Sunday's show. I suggest you get a good fitting pair of socks, with those tiny garder belts, as @Helena Blavatsky has already discovered... they may go flying off!
.
Until tomorrow, then! 😸
Does this guy have a youtube channel? My interest in monarchy has been piqued by this Calmversation.
@@wile-e-coyote8371 ... Yes, just as all those with an account here, but not sure what it is called. Tell you what... head to Matt Christiansen's channel Sun. & Wed. 6PM (EST) and will see him in chat. Tell me you are there and will introduce him and if so inclined, you can talk with him about it 😸
It isn't me but I find the idea of a monarchy also really compelling. If we're just being shoved around and propagandized we might as well just have a monarch. Less propaganda, less fighting, and so on.
Excellent discussion! All of the information I garnered from this video was great, except for Aydin's marital status. Damn, I guess i'm too late!
Monarchy, democracy, socialism...I believe just about any of these systems will or could work so long as the people are virtuous. None of these systems will work without a virtuous populace and none of these systems will magically make a populace virtuous. I think we need to develop virtue--not new political paradigms.
so then what ideology or form of government develops and promotes virtue?
@@mistahsusan2650 Traditional Christianity.
@@mistahsusan2650no ideology or government form. It has to be cultural or religious. If you want things to work it needs to come from the bottom up. Every functional society is based on a shared cultural or religious ethic, not a governmental system or political ideology
Socialism and communism have a calculation problem that precludes them working.
@@klemperal My primary objection to Chrisitanity, is moral: You have to worship a being that is content to throw most of humanity into eternal damnation. The very idea of that makes absolutely zero sense to me. Why keep beings alive, just to torture them eternally? What is it about faith in Jesus Christ, while in this earthly sphere, that is so meaningful, that couldn't be done after death? What's so noble or morally praiseworthy about caving in to a power that says, "Worship me, or I will torture you and everyone you know forever?" How is it that viewing all sins as equally grevious makes any sense? Why is God not interested in people's positive development? And why shut the door eternally after death, when death itself is mainly just an illusion? In what sense does Jesus Christ meaningfully sacrifice anything at all, in "dying," when death is just switching from one body to another for him, and he knows that? How can God wash his had of all responsibility, when he's making the rules of the game? What's God even trying to accomplish with all of this? The interpretation of the bible that is on offer, makes absolutely no moral sense, and ultimately amounts to: "Do what I tell you, otherwise I will punish you forever after you die." How is heaven even heaven, or the New Earth if you think that the resurrection matters as an idea (somehow lost in the last hundred something years:) if you know that people you love are burning forever?
I’m in love with her brain
Wow will need to watch again
Benjamin Thank you again
Are we awake now 🕊
Can't timestamp this during premiere, but Benjamin becomes my avatar at: "pushback from...Classical Liberal person is the threat to their freedom, the threat to their liberty".
I got you, bro. It's 29:05. Right after Aydin talks about the consequence of a bad monarch (beheading) vs a democratically elected sociopath (walk away, get at most a couple years jail)
This is a very interesting take. "Democracy" obviously isn't working out for anyone, and there aren't nearly enough people with the mental or moral fortitude to make Anarchy a viable option.
You two are people whose talks can help a lot of young folks. Keep up the good work, all the best from an Italian living in London.
Didn’t know the about the Breadtube funding link. But it makes sense.
Does it bother anyone else that she keeps comparing an idealized and fantastical monarchy to a corrupted, real-world democracy. Im not saying she's being dishonest, but it comes off as intellectually dishonest.
Well when anyone talks about their ideal political system, don't they all idealize them? I'm leaning towards libertarian monarchism myself but I do recognize that there are issues which need to be solved to make such a system work smoothly, which I believe it could. But this is true of all political systems as well is it not?
Thanks for interviewing this amazing young woman! Knock out intelligence. And such a quick mind.
I'm glad I got to see the Attack Helicopter video before it got struck .
It’s a bit tongue-in-cheek, but if being centrist didn’t seem so friendly to left wing craziness I would be one.
So glad to see her on!
40:45 It’s Alan Keyes. That clip surfaced on twitter recently
Wonderful to see Aydin and hear her flesh out her thoughts. Sounds like she might be a fan of Hans-Hermann Hoppe?
Fascinating discussion - listened to it twice, all the way through. As an older man, it's gratifying to hear to young people discuss deeply serious issues with such rigor.
Thank you.
Switzerland is not a constitutional monarchy, it's a republic. It's impressive to see Americans lecturing about Europe when they don't even know the basics. I've seen it so many times. Europe is ridiculously complex, also for Europeans, because there are so many European countries in cultures in a relatively small place. Even small countries like Switzerland can be themselves very multicultural and multilingual. With a few rare exceptions, Americans don't understand Europe.
And how is Switzerland homogeneous? It must be one of the least homogeneous countries in Europe, especially for such a small country. Once I saw Swiss people meeting each other abroad and they were unable to hold a conversation because they didn't have any language in common to understand each other:)
A fine selection of board games you have there 👀
The OSU Attack Helicopter goon is a public servant. They have no right to demand censorship of work funded by the people
White Rural Rage: Written by two people "who happen to be Jewish".... That's no coincidence
chances are they are self-hating jews who dont practice or believe in anyway shape or form.
Jews in name only
Who did Nazi this comment coming?
Considering how much CRT HATES Jews, it's not surprising at all.
go home anti-semite.
@@MasterMalrubiusamazing how a single ethnic group gets consistently persecuted worldwide for literally no reason.
Noticing is apparently antisemitism?
This interview was excellent!
Have either of you guys read Starship Troopers?
The government is an open oligarchy based on willingness to sacrifice on behalf of something greater than themselves, as exemplified by volunteering for federal service.
Wonderful guest need more Aydin make it happen Benjamin !
Buffy is a great show, it's the king of trick episodes.
First, establish strong rules for the setting, then break the rules one after another. There are reset buttons, but mostly it's one great story arc with good writers.
First season is a slog, but it gets better in the second season, and better after that.
Wow addressing the elephant in the room and everything. Good show, you have come a far way Ben.
Excellent talk.
Loyalist intellectuals when asked why they were leaving the US after the revolutionary War:
"Which is better - to be ruled by one tyrant three thousand miles away or by three thousand tyrants one mile away?" -Mather Byles
Who was the real threat? The king or the career politicians and bureaucrats?
Pithy but off by about 3,000 miles
@@annarboriteryou're right oops
Definitely the king
Yet, little was done when tyrant Abraham Lincoln was ruling America.
The is literally nothing to be said in favor of monarchism that doesn't, as an american, provoke a hostile reaction. Honestly most of the bs we see in america could be attributed to foreign influence from power-centralized monarchies which seek to dominate us
Ah yes the foreign influence of monarchies such as CHINA and ISRAEL and RUSSIA!
Dictatorships, monarchical in the ancient ways, not in the constitutional modern style@@campomambo
@@campomambo China, Israel & Russia are not monarchies. I do not think you know what a monarchy is.
@@user-bx4px7lj4x bruh, sarcasm
@@DavidSilva-mn4dz putin and netanyahu do not have dictatorial power rofl
As for China, that is a viable candidate, but I think the power structure operates fundamentally different from monarchs of the past. The closest thing to a dictator having monarchial like power would be a military state such as north korea. But none of those countries have had any significant degree of influence aside from being the basis of our foreign policy decisions. When China first became communist under Mao, they would have qualified; however, they didn't wield undue influence on america back then. The power dynamics in China are not the same as they were under Mao.
There is only one foreign monarchic power that I can think of that has significant influence, and that would be the Saudis. And turns out, they are a literal absolute Monarchy. So no need to add weird qualifications like "power-centralized".
The nature of the system is not absolute. No system can be any more moral than the worst people administering that system. All ideologies fail in some way at some point. Bad people do bad things. Bad ideas lead to bad decisions and bad outcomes. Some systems can be better than others, but no system even approaches perfection. The same goes for ideologies. It all boils down to having decent, moral, wise, effective people running the system. And even then, we have to remain constantly vigilant.
Some ideologies are more based in reality than others.
@@techpriest6962I agree.
Well said.
I also think scale matters _a lot._ A nuclear family can be essentially "communist" -- from those who can, to those who need, completely willingly -- but only because the scale is so small.
Like the way an iridescent, beautiful soap bubble can only expand to a certain point before it bursts and leaves a mess.
Fabulous episode.
The racist baby Convo is so interesting. I understood that after my mom died. When I see a woman that looks like her, instinctually I want to be near her. It makes perfect sense that babies seek out their mother's in other women.
Yes! I feel the same way, and this is what I wish more people understood.
I used to babysit for a baby who probably liked me better than other babysitters (according to his mom) because I looked somewhat similar to her, even though we're not the same race. It's just a comfort thing.
I love her!!!! She is very smart and able to explain data very well. I disagree with her monarchy views but her and spoon are great.
Thanks LOL
Oh I love spoon every time he speaks I think ' we really need go get the spoon and the little platoon together the sarcastic event horizon made real '
yeah its funny when he is giving Aydin crap too lol@@matthewrowe9903
Benjamin I'm confused you still haven't gotten over 100k yet. You've covered so much extensively in an impressive manner, your material is right up there in par with Malcom Gladwell. If you ever consider being apart of any publishing in the future pls let it be known. I've watched you since 2017!
41:45 this the consequence of liberalism. When individualism is your most important value of course you’ll get atomization. Libs criticizing woke makes no sense because progs are taking to the end the logical conclusions of liberalism. I know it’s popular to say but conservatism is progressivism driving the speed limit but liberalism is progressivism driving 5 over. It is why I reject James Lindsay’s resistance to the reactionaries and the idea that only liberalism can defeat woke. Liberalism didn’t stop woke ten years ago, why should we trust him?
His arguments feel like he started from the conclusion that he wanted Liberalism to be the answer and then tried to find an argument that would agree with him. James is smart, but smart isn’t immune from motivated reasoning.
Hahaha and I like watching interviews like this of you lot on the 'other side' because I can see enough of the comments to easily prove right the old adage,
*"Scratch a Liberal and a Fascist bleeds"*
In other words, maybe it is really LIBERALISM that is just "Fascism driving the speed limit"
Imagine being in Gaza and seeing bomb shrapnel with "made in Ohio" on it
Liberty = positive liberty and negative liberty according Isaiah Berlin. In short, Freedom to and Freedom from.
Yes, and thus if you have a society that values true liberty for all, you will develop essentially the Non-Aggression Principle. You’re free to do what you want as long as you aren’t abridging the freedom of others. Admittedly, the details of what counts as harming others are not as black and white, which is why it’s important that a society has a strong and moral shared culture to rule on where the lines are.
there are monarchies today you could look at. i don't know any country outside of usa that the people identify with a political identify.
1:37:34 😂 I didn't expect to Lol during a story about someone almost dying.
I'm wondering what is different from a monarch's self interest to look after his subjects as property (wards) of value to pass on to his heirs and an antebellum plantation owner's self interest to look after his property for the same end?
Idc what form of government we have as long as we get Singapore
After independence, pretty much a dictatorship.
In 1994 they sparked an international incident by sentencing an American teen to six strokes of the cane for vandalism.
Be helpful to make the distinction between monarchy and constitutional monarchy since its shown to be one of the most stable forms of governance.
Funny how I started the video thinking...'This will be an interesting conversation.' and ending it with 'Well done Bill...don't fuck this up buddy.'
Hans Herman Hoppe agrees with Aydin. So did John Locke.
Hoppe was influenced by Erik von Knuelt Leddin who she mentioned
@@TheCruxy Hey, thanks for Leddin me know.
Aydin Paladin is the only person who has ever lived up to the beauty of her avatar 😆
The feline 🐅with Holmes instinct! 😄 👀What is this!!!!??🤖 And also advances towards me!!!🙀
I would like to recommend to both of you a great book titled Ain't Nobody's Business If You Do:The Absurdity Of Consensual Crimes In The US,
written by a man named Peter McWilliams,it's a highly informative(and entertaining)
read. McWilliams himself died in prison of complications from AIDS;he was jailed on a charge of criminal possession of marijuana,which he was only using to help alleviate the
negative symptoms of the disease. When(then)president Bill Clinton was asked if he would pardon McWilliams due to the lowered severity of his crime he declined,but also told McWilliams(not directly of course) "I feel your pain",while having Air Force One keep his favorite beer stocked,which was brewed using hemp. The hypocrisy is real. Great video y'all. 👏👏👏👍
On Black History Month, you must not have watched PBS, it was on ad nauseam. It's was sickened and very annoying. I don't know how black folks aren't offended by that.
To be fair, what did you expect from PBS / NPR
A number, of us are offended but clearly, lol no one really perceives us and it is, by design- I think
The essence of liberty is the limitation of government. That government is best which governs least. No government is better than our government.
Nah, our government governs more than any other in history and is the worst generally.
I didn't realize the degree to which AP is based,
Bruh Aydin is aware of Erik von Knuelt Leddin? And name dropping him on a channel with almost 100k subs? 2024 is crazy
I'm here...
So long as you have that warm lap, here you shall remain 💜
@@NinjaKittyBonks 💜
Even if we're shamed for it? 😪😪😪
@@helenablavatsky9136 ... Absolutely. Shame only works on those who struggle with the choices they have made, versus the morality they impose upon themselves. There is no issue of a "moral failing" with lap timez, it is a kitty's right!😸
@@NinjaKittyBonks 💜💜💜💜💜
@@helenablavatsky9136 ... Like Millie Catson once sang a song... "If Loving Laps is Wrong, I Don't Wanna Be Right"
.
ua-cam.com/video/amb0JFw447k/v-deo.html
Your guest was wring to say Switzerland is a monarchy, is a very decentralised federal republic
Funny how smart people always sound so stupid when they start advocating for religion of any stripe, sectarian or secular.
Especially evolutionary bio and evolutionary psych enthusiasts
We all want Aragorn, but Nero is more likely.
Or worse yet,Denethor,the Steward of Gondor in the LOTR trilogy.
No representation w/o taxation!
Ethnocentrism is a scary, but important question. As someone from a (last century) immigrant group, I'm glad US emphasizes civic over ethnic nationalism. However, I appreciate that it's just not practical to the same extent, in many homogenous European countries. Furthermore, without ethnicity to facilitate cohesion, economic prosperity becomes VERY important.
I think culture is more important than ethnicity to promote cohesion. Culture and ethnicity are often closely related, but that's not a guarantee. One of the things that make us think in ethnic terms is that there's never been to date an ethnic shift that didn't create a cultural shift.
@@thomaslacroix6011 Great point. I mostly chalk this up to my own reductionism, and eccentricity, but tbh I'm not entirely convinced that "culture" in the sense we're discussing here, actually extends beyond a few of these other variables and stands on its own. I think assimilation is essential, and granted, that relies on the process of enculturation. But, I honestly wonder what we're REALLY doing when we assimilate groups. It's not a bad thing to suggest, that it's largely transactional. Speak the 'dominant' group's language, observe many of their foremost customs, and then benefit economically and enjoy the rule of law.
It's symbiotic, when a host country needs workers. Do ppl come to BELIEVE in something profound beyond this? That starts to sound like a faith system, to the extent that that arguably, necessarily plays in, this is why it's easier to 'integrate' peoples that already hail from Christian societies. In terms of nuanced differences, they can be a bitch, Catholics vs. Protestants etc. Does this facilitate mixing and matching ethnicities? I guess, but team Catholic for example I guess has been mostly Irish, Italian, Hispanic. Tribes can be multiethnic, but they're still tribes, and they unfortunately tend to include a limited number of specific ethnicities, and largely exclude others. So what abt "culture" then? It looks to me like an extension of tribal affiliations through various media, advertised often through sophisticated aesthetics, it's hard to see it as anything else. (An exploration of a form of media as such, is interesting and meta, but tends towards either parody or autism, cultural relevance may be limited).
@@Jules-Is-a-Guy what allows an ethnic group to stick together is a common belief in shared values. Betraying those values will get you a far worse treatment than any foreigner who actually respects them.
Culture, in the meaningful sense, is all the different factors that reinforce the shared values. Stories and art is a big one. Etiquette and all rules of what is considered polite is another one. A shared understanding of what is considered valuable is another one.
It's hard to say what exactly can make multiple ethnicities live together harmoniously, because it's a hundred different small factors that make everyone relate to each other.
One of the worst poison to multiethnic societies today is how easy segregating yourself can be not only from people far away, but from people near you, and living a life essentially detached in everything but economic transactions with other citizens. It allows the natural tendency to favor your own ethnicity to become maximized.
@@thomaslacroix6011 My agreement with what you say here, extends a pretty long way, far enough that I actually categorize myself as a Classical Liberal. These factors are not entirely negated by any means, but unfortunately are nevertheless put into perspective, by the latest discoveries in genetic science. I completely appreciate, and even somewhat share the impulse of most fair-minded, Liberal ppl to avoid this subject area, or automatically approach with skepticism. However, scientists simply know now, that the most salient variable that unites an ethnic group, is simply the genetic similarity that defines the ethnicity. (This might apply to "race" to a greater extent than "ethnicity," there are technical definitions for these terms, I tend to confuse them).
Aydin addresses this when she says that many ppl simply don't accept, or incorporate evolutionary biology (closely related field) she's correct, scientific findings are not debatable in the same way as politics. If they're proven wrong based on later findings, that's one thing (unlikely in this case,) and which specific debatable policies should be instituted on the basis of the information, is another thing. But this is just information, it's been shown that non-neurotic ppl are more comfortable with those more genetically related, and interact with and relate to them more easily, we can't fault ppl for this even though these sound like starkly Conservative and highly biased tendencies, most ppl actually ARE Conservative, and try to keep their biases in check in the healthiest way possible.
I acknowledge that the transactional nature of the ostensible, purely economic alternative to facilitate cohesion sounds shallow and alienating, that's why a centrist might argue for a blend of ethnic and civic nationalism. The right might find the transactional nature of 'pure civics' so off-putting, that they emphasize ethnic nationalism. The left might find the tribalist potential of ethnocentrism so dangerous, that they emphasize civic nationalism. I'm not here to vilify any faction, I just think it's a stretch to argue that anything other than economics is fundamentally the basis for civic nationalism, and genetics fundamentally the basis for ethnic nationalism. The main problem with exclusively emphasizing your above argument, is that all those things like aesthetic appreciation, caring abt values, behavioral tendencies, have all now been shown to be highly genetically heritable.
@@Jules-Is-a-Guy The counterargument to that might be accounted for or not, but I would have to look into the studies you mentioned, here it is anyway
The brain naturally recognizes patterns, and ethnicity is most of the time highly correlated with cultures. So even if we consciously try to analyze these factors separately, the blending of culture and ethnicity is a baked-in bias that is mostly omnipresent.
As I'm saying that, I realize that it quickly becomes a difference without a distinction. If it's so hard to separate ethnicity from culture that no one can do it, only dystopian levels of social engineering would be able to change that.
Why does everyone keep saying that women are more empathetic ? In my line of work I find them clearly LESS empathetic than men.
Ahh, but what if I kill the King’s deer for food? Am I in trouble? (I just watched Robin hood 😆)
Aydins on a Ben-Jamin' Boyce stream; QUICK, BILL, GET THE MACE.
Wow, I remember watching Aydin when she first started making videos. Prior to face reveal. Guess her positions have changed a bit. Guess I moved the same direction too lol.
The Fountain is an amazing movie. It's the only 'romantic' movie that actually hit my chest, and I'm an old jaded bastard.
You should guest on Aydin's Broken Crown podcast
peer review is ideological recognition and confirmation
I used to find monarchy appealing until I read a biography on Ivan the Terrible. To be ruled by a fair and just monarch might be tolerable, but being ruled by a cruel and insane one would be hell on earth.
Breadtube is a husk, its been funny watching Vaush becoming a retread of Dick Cheney.
Aydin, yey!
Democracy ROCKS!
(Assuming people are not apart of it)
This applies to all systems. 🙃
18:18 Liberty vs Equality
The problem here is that Liberty can be defined in two ways: freedom to be responsible and accountable and freedom from responsibility and accountability. Since this was never clarified, we have given everyone the freedom from responsibility and confused the two. Because of this confusion we have absolved people of service and duty as civic citizens. And by giving everyone freedom and the right to vote, we diluted the meaning of voting, and the accountability attached to it.
Kinda like printing money lessens the value
Read the book
Equality is a man punching a woman in the face and breaking bones. That's your equality. Even then it's not equal. Because of the two people and biology. Yet the opportunity is equal.
They both get the same opportunity to fight each other. In no way is the outcome ever equal. Even an untrained 5'7" 170lb man vs 120lb black belt woman is unequal by definition.
The book The Ancient City from Imperium Press is worth looking at here.
As well as Galateo by Giovanni Della Casa and The Book of the Courtier by Baldassare Castiglione.
These three books can be a good guide.
It delves into
- Gentleman and Lady( Galateo and The Book of the Courtier) Hint: Not all women are Ladies, but all Ladies are women. Just like All Gentlemen are men, but not all men are Gentlemen. Lady and Gentlemen have their own ideals, customs, expectations and codes of honor. Yet compliment each other)
- Manners ( Galateo)
- How families acted( Ancient City)
- How men ruled their homes ( Ancient City)
- What a Living Room is( Ancient City)
- Metaphysical ideals
- Gentleman Ideals ( The Book of the Courtier)
Also, Knights were often used to solve local and small disputes amongst the population.
You went to him if your neighbor hurt your cow or the like.
If it's a bigger issue then the Knight takes it to his Lord . And if it's a very big issue then the Lord takes it to the King. There is a Chain of Command.
A Knight must do this. He cannot not do it. Less the Lord punish him . And that punishment can be severe. Because responsibility,duty and status increases the punishment upon you over say a peasant. A peasant will be punished but a Knight will receive a harsher punishment for the same crime. He's held to a higher standard. Where the peasant is not.
Separation of Church and State was mentioned in one letter. Look at the East Coast. It's founded upon Puritism. No Separation of Church and State there. They even had State sandtioned churches. Hmmmmm.
The Puritans rejected Separation of Church and State. Its why Massachusetts is Massachusetts.
Don't you vote with your money every time you buy something?
When was the last time you heard an economist or politician advocate mandatory accounting in high schools?
To me, at least, the last ten years have maid it blatantly clear that the human brain has a god shaped hole in it.
11:13 It’s what Colttaine called the Female Power Fantasy. Where women see themselves as the villain and get away with it. The Other Woman and How to be Single had characters that were incredibly similar to Barbie 2023.
I agree with this. Democracy is broken. But tribalism within a republic is a more modern alternative to monarchy. Monarchy is also too prone to corruption. Instead people could organize into sovereign tribes, so that the tribes could compete for members.
Woww im so happy for her baptism!! It's the real watershed moment!
I agree Catholicism looks cucked. We've had problems since mid 20th century.
Try to find a Traditional Latin Mass. You may have to search for FSSP, Institute of Christ the King, or SSPX now, and theyre all valid. Or the Ordinariate is small but all English.
No parish is perfect and crazies are everywhere but we have great potlucks and homeschooling groups.
It would be interesting, and probably funny, to examine 'sayings' as they reflect culture; from "birds of a feather flock together' to 'step on a crack, break your mothers back'...#re-hash
I always thought 'sapiosexual' was a dumb concept, until i heard Aydin.
Now I just hate whatever word that's for simps who hate simps.
I'd like to have Aydinpaladin talk with Curtis Yarvin
A few points I've gathered from the discussion.
1. Given the research of Edward Dutton, I think if the right is more of a cultural force in the future we at see more "noble" like culture or an autocracy. Even without the rise of right wing culture, as the population increases apathy toward voting haa grown. People prefer to complain rather than take action. So they might accept an autocracy or monarchy as attractive if it keeps them from working harder.
2.
Making movies making song and fightin round the world
I think the diference of marriage is that is a contract between 2 adults that bound them to work as a asociates in order to raise the children, along side with lastnames to help to diserning who fathered x child, the keeping of virginity till marriage and not adultering avoiding fatherless children and the tough grind of singlemotherhood, avoiding romance and choosing a partner that can share the burden of living as an adult. So, yeah, many reasons of the requirenent of marriage do not apply to childless longterm heterosexual couples and lesbian and homosexuals ones, yet the possibility of parenting adopted exist, and having a team of 2 adults sharing the responsability of taking care and preparing children to the world still exist, and unlike sports and body capabilities of the 2 sexes, men and women are pretty even in the affairs of the mind, the heart. Is pretty diferent to my eyes to willingly ignore the physical characteristic of a female human in sports, in private spaces and in childbearing.