Since no one asked about how disorganized fascists and cultists actually are, I'll just put it here: The phrase "Hitler made the trains run on time" is comically false. The Nazi rail system was famously inefficient, with people reporting logjams of thousands of train cars. The phrase was originally "MUSSOLINI made the trains run on time," but the trains only ran on time because he diverted funds from other public services that became horribly inefficient. He focused on the trains to demonstrate Italian superiority, similar to Hitler's autobahn, and, like most such demonstrations, it was a facade. It didn't demonstrate the efficiency of fascism, it was one, single pocket of effective government, propped up by the whims of a dictator, and at the expense of other departments, and it lasted only until the dictator decided to focus on something else. A professor in college showed me pictures of the Hitler Youths falling asleep in their seats because the Nazis required multi-hour meetings from 12-year-olds and didn't know how to fill the time. The image of fascist efficiency is propaganda. Fascist governments are disorganized and chaotic, propped up by the ego of a paranoiac with more power than he knows what to do with. The same goes for cults. One of the leading ways people exit cults is the cult simply falls apart under its own mismanagement. Don't believe the hype.
A short note on Mussolini and trains: the railway workers were one of the most unionized categories of workers at the time and one of the first acts of the fascist regime was to fire thousands of them right after getting to power in 1923. They had to rely on the army then to make the railways work since they didn't have enough railway workers.
Whether it be stop-and-frisk or the border wall, the right here in America values shows of strength and control over anything practical or efficient as long as they've been promised to support the "deserving" population who believe they're entitled to the American dream at the expense of the "undeserving" population who are leeching off their unclaimed greatness.
This is truly impressive. I'm a fairly good public speaker, but I couldn't do nearly so well with the questions. I have asked people to restate in the form of a question.
He's so patient with all of them, too. They're all grandstanding because they have a microphone and an audience and he's trying to direct it back to a meaningful discussion.
I think its an academic audience, so yeah Academics tend to ramble and waffle. Being able to translate that into regular-folk language is kind of a key talent of public communication
@@dynamicworlds1 - I don't think it's _that_ weird honestly. As the political landscape becomes more polarized and heated, it's difficult to find a place to speak your mind. Speak out in a group of friends and you suddenly find out one is a massive fan of Jordan Peterson and a closet alt-righter. So when they're at an event like this they're "safe" to get it of their chest among like-minded people. It's like an emotional support group, like AA, but for political anxiety. 🤷🏻♀️
it's also a matter of the individual's information processing type - eg i think in concepts and images, and to fully understand an idea i have to listen to it and also talk about it to properly store in in my brain. That means that i might have the concept of a question in my head, but i don't know exactly what words to use to express it until i've kind of spoken stream-of-consciousness for a little bit. there were a couple of people who seemed to be doing that here.
I've been in the situation of "Q" several times, and I recognise my earlier attempts. You go to the seminar/lecture and have what you think is a clear idea (and sometimes it really is a clear, easy to follow idea) but when it's time for Q&A you start to have doubts that the person will be able to follow your reasoning. So you decide to include that reasoning in your question, even though it probably would be better to ask the question, listen to the answer and fill in any blanks if needed/asked for.
Yeah, I think everyone was probably thinking "Oh boy, this guy is about to act like Greek philosophers are somehow an unimpeachable authority." All things considered, it wasn't as cringey as it could have been. He was more just making the point that even thousands of years ago people were saying that Democracy is vulnerable to being subverted by authoritarians, is the internet really anything new?
I could have gone off on how Plato also disliked democracy because it would logically grant rights to women and slaves, but that didn't seem constructive.
Plato politeia. Read it. Hoped the city metaphor goes on for 2pages. But no. And thought, aha, that's where all dictators got their ideas from. Actually reading Plato should rid everyone from trying to make arguments of authority about Plato.
An under-recognised talent is being able to turn a meandering question (sometimes it's just a statement) into a concise question and giving a thoughtful answer. There wasn't even any pauses! Good job!
Soooo... as an Autistic person who is also a leftist and has been called "a good ally" by LGBTQ+ people.... (I'm not sure how great an ally I actually am, tbh. I try. I really care more that there be more 'good allies' than be the only one 'cus that's sorta depressing, but anyway) I sometimes accidentally do this too... If you look at what he asked afterward and parse the historical context to it was about economic anxiety and how Hitler claimed he could fix that if they would blame the Jewish people and elect him, and is that why people are attracted to the alt-right(?) which is what happened. And isn't controversial. What the speaker has probably done is they got anxious and felt they needed to qualify it. Probably because they themselves also believe that economic injustice is a big problem and needs to be solved, but they are probably also worried about things being taken out of context and then they, themselves, being called supporters of Hitler. If you examine their full comment, you can tell their fear was unfounded, but in the person's head it was probably a legitimate fear. For example, there was (and maybe still is?) a trend of calling leftists "fascists" and Hitler supporters despite that being patently false. But that trend can really get into our heads (to tie back into the last 3 videos, in a way that is very similar to abuse) and cause us to maybe believe it on some level. Especially those of us who might be isolated from others due to more noticeable abusive family or social situations and/or psychological conditions such as Autism and generalized anxiety disorder. So the qualifiers happen because we're worried about being (falsely) compared to the people that we dislike (fascists). The qualifiers can and do frequently throw people off - but you sorta have to weed past them for at least a little bit to see whether what the person says after indicates that they're a person from the left who has been beaten down to much and is pre-emptively giving themselves an escape plan if someone starts insulting them (and or if they're just not great with words) or if they're an actual fascist trying to excuse Hitler. The alt-right as an abusive relationship is real bruv.
One of the things I've noticed about the internet in recent years is that people get really caught up in how things are phrased and don't bother to try and suss out what was meant. Communication doesn't work that way--It's a process filled with errors and it requires error-checking and TIME. I think the side effect is that only the simplest ideas survive because people are afraid to risk anything that doesn't fit on a bumper sticker. Fascists live and breathe on simplistic ideas. TL;DR: Good comment. Thanks.
It's funny how the strategies you start outlining at 12:30 are very similar to tactics on proselytizing I learned as an evangelical kid. The whole idea of 'you can't convert by arguing', 'keep it on your perspective on life', & 'find out the actual root other's pain' were things I learned in mission school (& ultimately were the ideas about faith that turned me leftward). Even though the Evangelical establishment finds no use for this technique in the culture war, it's interesting how that personal connection seems to be most effective. (And I recognize how *privileged* a technique it is to employ.) Evangelicals taught me everything I know about persuasion, and I will gleefully use their methods against them.
Tricksterbelle That’s interesting. I guess they really faced the same problem, how to appeal to someone without activating their resistance and pushing them away. Semantics in general is really fascinating especially when you think about how it has its roots in almost everything. Facts don’t just advertise themselves, they have to be presented in a way that people will listen to. Even in the sciences, new theoretical ideas may be right but they require advocacy to gain traction like how there is a variety of interpretations for Quantum Mechanics. I learned that from watching Sean Caroll who is an excellent physics communicator. The reason I mention all that is because when you tell someone that semantics and rhetoric is a big part of politics they might think “so you’re basically manipulating people?”. But it’s not about lying it’s about deploying a line of communication in a way that people come to the conclusions your trying to express. We need good communicators on the left and also be constantly improving our skills.
I've always found it weird how a group of people that - from what I've often been exposed to of them - seem so given to strawmanning their opponents and been so confident in their obviously flawed arguments, could ever have any luck with going from door-to-door in their attempts to find converts. If they know the techniques that actually work when persuading folk to convert, it's just really odd that they seem to express so little understanding as to, for instance, why most folk don't see secularism or consideration for non-Christian faiths as some "War on Christianity". Like, how do you earnestly believe this rubbish about the inherent evil in people who disagree with you, yet turn it off long enough to not piss them off?
@@thomasm.creamer2728 Yeah it definitely seems contradictory, and if I were to guess probably most Evangelical and highly religious people don't actually ground out there beliefs. This seems pretty intuitive for most of us on the left, so maybe the OP just got lucky with a highly competent mentor who taught them the same strategies that can be used against them. Also, being on the right as I assume most of those people are , they could be extra suseptible to using the argument styles that are so common among right wingers, pretty much bad faith and being uncritical and often contradictory in how they treat different kinds of information depending on whether or not it is consistent with their doctrines.
proselytizing is designed to look like exposure therapy but actually drive you back to the church|in-group. Every rejection / failure combined with the praise for doing the good work
@@thomasm.creamer2728 It's really simple. Most persuasion techniques have fuck all to do with reason and evidence. Which is why they can sell you on magic. Despite the utter lack of evidence for any of this stuff.
Ian you are one of the greatest public speakers i have ever seen. Q&A's are so hard to manage, and you made it look incredibly easy, from restating the question in a concise and accurate manner to making super relevant points that actually get to the heart of the questions asked. BRAVO, SIR! Bravo.
I think you're giving far more forgiving to the Authorities and legal system @ ~15:45 than they deserve. More pointedly, you're ascribing to them the status of "unaware" about internet culture. As has been shown this past month where tons of people were arrested for online threats made against the police -- it's not that they don't know. It's that they don't _care_ when those threats are made against others. The moment the threat is made against them? Instant action. They just don't care enough to use their power properly. It's the same dynamic when talking about men and consent. Think "non-woke" men don't understand consent? Throw a couple of homophobic ones into a gay bar with some bears and watch just how fast they demonstrate that they know _precisely_ what you're talking about.
@Aru Gula - Oh look guys, this one thinks he's original and _totally_ didn't feel compelled by some inner tension to drop a red herring and miss the point.
@@smallpseudonym2844 It's noteworthy that they are so bothered by the example they want to redirect the topic and shut it down. I think that illustrate your point about how aware and defensive people can be when it's their own boundaries.
@Aru Gula As someone who's seen this shit happen many, many times, I can tell you that it's not even close to "hyper-specific". You wanting to ignore other people's experiences doesn't make them not real.
"You tried so hard to make a gotcha that you ended up claiming that there have never been any Nazis ever. Good job. WWII disagrees." HEYOOO. Excellent retort to that fuck head Aru.
Great job. It's pretty difficult to present your research face to face to people who aren't active online and rooted in these sorts of discussions, and you explained it well. Also, welcome to my neck of the woods!
I can barely teach my dad how to use his phone without wanting to pour gasoline on my head and drop a match, and yet this guy was successful in teaching a bunch of boomers how online hate groups gain traction.
@@araxiel569 The good kind of boomers though. There are definitely boomers on "our side" When he talks about the year 2013, that's quite interesting because not only does that apply to the US, but it applies to the UK too The EDL collapsed around 2013. Fortunately what we don't have here in the UK , is "the religious right" My parent's country (Pakistan) definitely has "the religious right"
I see the critique, but as a person who has both asked questions at speeches like this and been the recipient of such questions, the format of the questions are (basically) appropriate. My reasoning is that it gives the presentor an opportunity to address *your" specific position and *your* specific response to her/his presentation. That being said, he did a great job feilding those questions. :)
I'm not even halfway through the video and I'm just phenomenally impressed with your composure and patience when people ask two-minute rambly "questions". Also, unrelated but your outfit is awesome and I dig it!
PewdiePie revoking his donation to a Jewish charity and talking about it in a video where he's wearing an Iron Cross makes it very clear that at the bare minimum he's not that bothered by his fan base having too many alt-righters in it and is more than happy cater to them. It might still be a stretch to say that means he is definitely an alt-right racist himself but his actions make it less and less of a stretch.
@@whiteash2797 it's at the very start. Good on you for doing you research because it's WAY less sensational than it sounds ua-cam.com/video/PbfX3ZyHLJg/v-deo.html
@@poluicionador so creaming himself over 12 Rules for Life and following tons of alt-right figures on Twitter was part of a failed satirical performance? Seems like a stretch
On the second question, I think it's a little like Rugby. Primarily, each player is moving sideways, but the point is to move sideways and forwards. It doesn't have to be by a lot, it just has to add up to a lot. We don't need the Wall Street Journal criticising Pewdiepie. We need the role models of the people following pewdiepie to be saying "that was not cool" and turn his fans against that sort of thing. Only problem is he's a brand on his own- he could lose 90% of his audience and still contribute millions of viewers to the alt-right. So cutting him off isn't necessarily an option? Edit: looking snazzy- that's a cool tie
I really like how kind you are. Not only is that good just because we need more people like that because we have so few but also it’s useful in political discourse. People are more inclined to listen and change their mind.
I would pose a follow-up question to that last question: how do you know when it's too late to "reach out" to someone? Because let's face it, a lot of these people have made up their minds. They're ready to reject the entire concept of us as people, let alone anything we have to say? How can we tell if someone is just a lost cause, unwilling to leave the space they're in and is actively hostile, sometimes violently, to anyone that might bring them out of it?
You can't. Because a firmly made up mind is a few experiences away from doubting those very beliefs. It''s a very subjective and personal thing. Also, many times, it takes the word of someone that's trusted or credible, that will be listened to in good faith, which then leads to being OPEN to a new idea or perspective. Just gotta keep your eyes open for it. Vigilence, my friend, and compassion. It's a long watch, but it's worth it.
@@Lailoken2 But that's the thing: a lot of these people _aren't_ going to listen to you, let alone in good faith. They come at you ready to dismiss whatever you say, looking for any small reason why. They've been programmed _not_ to trust credible sources if they contradict their worldview. Whatever doubt or cognitive dissonance they feel will quickly be corrected with some BS rationalization and they're protected from the truth once again. I am not a patient person. I am not the type to risk wasting my time with such uncertain odds. If you think it's worth it, go ahead and reach out. But I can't be here gambling on some "maybe" all the time.
Not saying don't live your life, just keep that eye out for those that are reachable. And yes, some are gonna be ready with a shield. But you can't tell how strong the shield is. And mainly, when it's thin, it dissolves after the convo, when you are gone and they are thinking about what you said. That sucks for you in the moment, because you don't get to see the work you put in pay off directly. But the next person will, and maybe they come back to you. Either way, it's worth the eye and the try. Because alternative is more of the same. And look how that's working out. Hard truths, man.
So Last Question Guy at one point ponders "do you think we [more lefty oriented people] should be trying to reach out to them? Not to sleazily recruit them into some movement, but..." And this kind of way of thinking makes me think a lot of Emerican Johnson. One of the things he hammers on very strongly all the time is actually in regards to how we are taught to see and think of politics and propaganda as "dirty words" and that marries into a lot of the right's rhetoric. Socialism is "ideology", neoliberalism is "human nature". And this kind of thing gets repeated in various forms. At the same time they're shifting the Overton window, masquerading their tactics and attacking the left. Emerican's response to this is to just come with a hammer and a megaphone to very subtly proclaim things like "being a leftist means you oppose capitalism" and "yes, we are propagandists. That's what we're doing here [on non-compete], we're here to explain and try to sell you leftist politics and ideology". And I actually think that when you look at people like Last Question Guy, it shows why. Yes people should be trying to recruit them into a movement, but there's nothing "sleazy" about it necessarily. Movements aren't dodgy by default, to paraphrase Dan himself, "the problem of the right is not that they work on beliefs, is that what they believe is a bunch of garbage". If political thinking and action remains stigmatised, the right will continue pushing their own propaganda. After all, neoliberalism is already everyone's daily life, and increasingly so.
thank you for all of your hard work. to the what do we do about it question, I'd say you're doing it right now. can't fix a problem if you don't know it exists. I think that's especially true with how adaptable fascisim is.... THANK YOU!
Please don't be so harsh to these people, everyone. They are forming the questions as they speak and it can seem a little ranty, but they're just trying to present the position from which they're actually asking their question. It's not concise, so what? They didn't have time to think things over and form a nice, precise query. That is how our minds work. Also, they might not completely understand the Internet and social media of today but have probably invested much more time and commitment in actual activism in their lifespan than most of us ever will. Be kind and understanding, like Ian was. We need more of that in the world. And many of us here failed to show this a little bit.
Yeah, he's stated that this is a forum of middle-aged activists. My conjecture from that is that they have more basis in philosophy and being in public events, but not that much experience with the internet. I think it's necessary for them to voice their questions on it, no matter how meandering, since the point of having Ian there in the first place is teaching and informing them about how the ideology they've been fighting for the past like 20+ years has evolved.
Why do you think they didn't have time to properly construct their questions? They just watched an entire presentation, and in some Q&A situations (not sure if this was similar) they have to stand up and wait in line to get to the mic and ask their question. That seems like plenty of time to think about what you want to ask...
The stuff about the Versailles treaty being this massive unpayable economy ruining debt is also not true, ask historians on reddit has has some good discussions on this: www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/agk02r/according_to_some_badhistory_posts_the_treaty_of
"Economic anxiety" as an argument by itself is self-defeating. It's basically conceding that any white person who's mildly inconvenienced will have no choice but to drive head-first into fascism by nature.
@@NRobbi42 well said Sir. I am also currently experiencing economic anxiety but am not trying to murder brown people, so I am either bad at anxiety or MAYBE there is something else going on here? I wonder what that could be?
@@NRobbi42 That's not true at all. The argument is that economic anxiety pushes people who are already somewhat sympathetic to fascism over the edge. It exacerbates what's already there, like smog triggering an asthma attack.
@@deadeaded That's why I said "by itself". Some often claim that otherwise decent people are being _tricked_ into fascism by spooky billionaires exploiting their fear of being impoverished when the reality is just as you said.
I love that people come out to these sorts of speaking engagements... but when the Q&A sessions start, I have to wonder if most of the people taking the mic understand the concept. In theory: 1) Question. 2) Answer. In practice, apparently: 1) "It seems in my opinion that we are sliding towards a berpity herpdy derp provoked by the insistence and persistence of toxifying shmoopy doop, therefore catalyzing the innate acquiescence heretofore thereby... *10 minutes later* ...when in fact the causation of such yarpy flarp can be attributed to capitalistic underpinnings not unfamiliar to the current structures." 2) "...okay, so I think the question was..."
I notice that there are already dislikes. I clicked into this video less than twenty seconds after it was posted. This is the exact trends this channel discusses, where people are obviously subscribed, obviously following, and making an active effort to undercut the value of this content (In the eyes of a potential audience) by downvoting without ever listening to a word that's being said.
@@peterprime2140 I'm a social media consultant by profession, generally clients don't count negative sentiment in high regard. 😜 But you're absolutely right, downvoting doesn't really do anything as far as the UA-cam algorythm is concerned. It may affect how audiences view content, though, so I'll edit my original comment to make it a little clearer. Thank you!
Peter Prime is right. Upload 2 videos of the same video. Same length. Same video. Same everything. Click dislike on one video. Leave the other video alone. Ex em both out and then search for the video... Guess which one pops up first? The disliked one...
Ian, you did a great job articulating yourself so well, here. In particular, summarising the statements of the audience members into questions. I'm delighted to support you as a patron now.
Bro just gotta say I love your content and it never clicked with me that you were the guy who also made the smash spectator sport video. Just when I thought you couldn't get more relatable and cool, my brain says "they sound simmilar, wait a minute..."
Here’s a question: alt-rightists often seem to blame - let’s say ‘wokescolds’ - for their move to the right. The narrative seems to be that they encountered people with an outlook they were unfamiliar with, said some things they didn’t realise were offensive, asked some questions, or raised what they considered to be good-faith points of disagreement, and got totally blasted for it - leading them to feel that the right was a better option because they wouldn’t get their heads bitten off for minor linguistic offences. So: how much truth is there in that? On the one hand, yeah, there definitely are people who flame other people in the name of the left or liberalism, and they can be very alienating. On the other hand, not everyone reacts that way to being flamed, and it’s a very convenient narrative for blaming the existence of the alt right on the left. How much of it is truth, would you say, and how much is propaganda?
I think it's intellectual laziness on people who don't want to have their views challenged, or even do the bare minimum amount of work to try and find out why some people might have a problem with something they said. Like, I didn't know a lot about Trans people before I went to college, and I had some painfully centrist takes on things that caused me to be fairly insensitive at times. I could have just gone on whinging about "snowflakes" or such nonsense, but I think listening to what others have to say, in full, without been mediated third-hand by bad-faith actors who condone horrendous things, did me a world of good.
I feel like those are two party-line answers, one from the right and one from the left, neither of which really engages with the point. I’m not gonna bother with Aru Gula because that individual is all over these threads doing that, but Thomas M. Creamer ... The question isn’t ‘Shouldn’t they react differently?’, that’s kind of a given. What I’d like to know is how accurate a claim it is that wokescolding drives people right, because if it is, then unwelcome as it might be to hear, that’s actually useful information that could be learned from. If it’s propaganda, on the other hand, then it’s not. We need a reasonably clear answer on the question of whether it’s true before moving to the conclusion that it’s still their fault. That’s actually accepting their framing, which I don’t think we have to do. Sorry, mate, I’m not trying to scold you! But I do think that you’re leaning towards answering a question about the facts as if it’s a question about relative virtue, which is not really the question. It’s not about who’s the better person, it’s about what does and doesn’t produce a good result.
@Aru Gula And I could simply and honestly say the same of the Right - it honestly wouldn't be that hard to find examples. In my personal experience, conservatives didn't seem to have a lot of curiosity about why some folk end up on different paths in life - things like why some identify as LGBT or Feminist to more existential questions about why some become homeless, or become addicted to some substance. The approach always seems to be that any "deviant" characteristics represent failings by individuals who made dumb decisions for dumb reasons which have no wider societal explanation. It did always strike me as irrational to assume that LGBT people or women would "pretend" that their adverse personal experiences don't exist, just by virtue of the huge backlash any of them get whenever they challenge the narrative that we live in some inherent meritocratic world, or if we didn't, that they somehow deserve worse lives for the crime of losing the birth lottery. It also seemed ridiculous to attribute poverty to laziness - when, in fact, there is little inherent link between how hard people work and what they actually get in return, rents have a habit of increasing by rates that far surpass wage growth, and we have an odd situation where people can apparently vote on policies as complex as international diplomacy, but yet the idea of them having a similar say in their own workplaces is considered anathema to the powers that be. Considering the callousness of the system defended by the right, which inherently delegitimises people's experiences and struggles and shows utterly no compassion for the consequences of maintaining such a status quo, I can't honestly see a good reason to trust why the Ben Shapiros of this world, whose idea of debate is shouting down college students in front of a jeering audience, would have any contributions to make to the real problems our world is facing into. The Left actually has discussions on things like Climate Change (and the potential consequences that will have down the line in terms of climate refugees, energy transition, etc.), homelessness, health and education access, workplace empowerment, public transport, etc. The right pretends those problems don't exist, proposes solutions that makes them drastically worse, and somehow expects me in turn to be a lot more concerned about not been able to say the N-word without any social consequences than about things that actually affect the lives of my family and friends.
@@kitwhitfield7169 That's fair - for what it is worth, a thing I notice is that the same people who complain about "wokescalding" makes the same complaint along the lines of "OMG, you can't say a word nowadays - I'll think what I want, and you can fuck off" even if you so much as ask them to consider whether it's a tad extreme to be attributing a terrorist attacks to allowing any Muslims to immigrate into the country. I don't doubt that some well-intended folk fall into the "wokescalding" category, but at times, it seems like people are primed to storm off in a huff about "liberals shouting over them" no matter how you word the disagreement. Maybe that's just the kind of folk I met in my life that are that over-sensitive, but I think it is worth bearing in mind.
Thomas M. Creamer I don’t doubt it, but then, if someone’s already acting that way, then you can assume they’re already primed. This isn’t exclusive to the alt-right; many online communities develop hair-trigger habitual responses, and if someone’s alt-right it’s a safe bet they have a high water-table when it comes to stress. What I’m wondering about is the starting point - which, of course, is likely to be different for different people. Once someone’s already cussing people out, odds are they’ve been around a while. (Also, if you haven’t met ill-intended wokescolds who just like bullying people and feeling righteous about it, well, I have. They’re a minority, but let’s not pretend any one political position has a monopoly on bellends! And then there’s people who aren’t intending to be mean, but who’ve been through too many flame wars and are short-fused as a result, who have, let’s say, lost sight of their good intentions. I don’t think we get anywhere assuming good intentions are the only thing that ever happens on the left.)
Yup, that's the point. It was also the point with Dubya. You can get away with a lot more if people think you do it because you're stupid than you can if they think you do it because you're evil.
@@bravetherainbow it is surprising. The amount of times we were told "actions speak louder than words". If you look at the voting records of Conservatives in the UK, it's remarkably easy to disseminate their true feelings. "We believe in equality of sexuality" says the Conservative who voted for bills that would stymie the rights of the LGBTQ community, just because they want votes.
Actually, you can say that about the political Left as well. Plenty of times their records don't reflect their words. We really do need to start following policy and not people.
Woah I'm genuinely impressed with this video. I generally don't find q&a vids very useful or interesting but there is some genuine insight for my day to day interactions. Thanks for posting
On talking about what life is like from a leftist perspective: this is true, and I think a lot of liberals, especially older ones, don’t understand this. My boomer liberal parents held strong to the idea that talking about politics is somehow gauche or bad manners. The problem is (as it is with many instances): the Right rarely holds themselves to the same standard, and it doesn’t take long for a conservative to unashamedly start ranting about how Obamacare is communism at the slightest provocation. I’m a leftist and a DSA member, and importantly: my non-political friends know it. I talk all the time about my perspective on issues. And yes, I’ve seen results (one of my friends went from complaining about SJW’s in 2017 to reaching out to me unprompted to ask how he could phone bank for Biden in 2020. I never told him to do that; all I did was talk, and he found his way to me eventually).
I think the most useful question was the last one because this is basically "the 4Chan problem" ie this is where being angry, confused and horny likes to congregate and there is a point in life where that's actually normal: adolescence. I think "trusting 4Chan" to normalize your sons is as bad an idea as taking panal as a basis for exploring sex. Don't let your sons be taught about PoC's, sexual minorities, and self-esteem by recreational sociopaths. Somebody should also get on considering an alternative as the better things about a Chan board are their creativity and freedom of non-hate-based expression (I swear that was _once_ a thing.) A version of that model that allows porn, nerd fixations and anonymity but that steps on hate speech might work. I remember a few old timers who weren't comfortable with n-bomb "jokes" and who are possibly a model for something like 4Chan but not drowning in fascist opportunists and mutually enabling edgelords. This is also called "The Free Marketplace of Ideas" and we know that's a bad idea. So yeah, Lefties? Get on this shit.
@@marcgottlieb9579 I guess the Jews must have taken your reading comprehension since you decided that this comment was a good place to advertise your Q garbage.
@Aru Gula does it really matter in an enviroment where no one is even a little bit encouraged to respect each other? it always seemed uncivil to me and defending anything you say there always struck me as pointless.
@Aru Gula When a community is welcoming to both sheep and wolves all you get is wolves. 4chan has the most shallow idea gene pool on the whole internet.
That bit at the end where he effectively says 'elevating people on the left and recruiting people from the right are both important and can both be done in tandem' really illustrated for me what I love about being a leftie The right often frames decisions as one or the other where in the left things are more often seen as some version of both of these things are worth doing so let's figure out how to make that happen, which is often much closer to the actual minutia of the decisions the right 'forces'
I just ran into this when somebody replied to a comment I made on a friend’s post. They admitted to being a libertarian, which I later described as “lite-beer republicanism”, because all libertarians do is complain about problems without suggesting solutions. When he did point out that he had offered A SINGLE solution (allow schools/teachers to arm themselves) I pointed out how, conveniently, he will only ever offer criticisms of left talking points that he “can’t see” helping the problem, but how he jumped on “arming teachers” as the “obvious” solutions. I’ve seen people on the political left suggest a variety of solutions - Gun safety legislation, mental health services, healthcare reform, social safety nets - but people on the political right just don’t. They believe these issues can only be solved by singular, monolithic, mutually exclusive, solutions. These topics aren’t complex issues that should be understood and solved as such, they are singular and simple entities to be combatted by “morality” and “personal responsibility” and, yes “guns, obviously”.
this is the opposite of the truism "never presume to be malice what could also be explained by stupidity." but the real question is, does anybody willingly do evil? that's the difference between evil and stupidity isn't it, it's whether you know what you're doing. however, don't most evil people believe their actions to be in service to some sort of good? In that way, the evil are morally stupid, they do not know the good, because if they knew it was evil, they probably wouldn't do it.
"Evil comes from a failure to think. It defies thought for as soon as thought tries to engage itself with evil and examine the premises and principles from which it originates, it is frustrated because it finds nothing there. That is the banality of evil."-Hannah Arendt
@@zerarch77 Not even remotely close, violence and rage are not evil. those are caused by a lack of thought, but evil, evil has to be calculating by its nature.
@transylvanian I am aware. I disagree with "...actions were motivated by a sort of stupidity which was wholly unexceptional." It's more, "Actions motivated by wholly unexceptional reason, disguised to appear as a form of stupidity."
He didn't quite make it on the first question, though the question was clear from context. Kinda hard to repeat a lot of these questions, too, when it's someone dropping their whole dissertation on how the modern US mirrors 1930s Germany.
It's heartwarming and motivating to know that the creator of this really impressive channel is taking his expertise and speaking to rooms of folks who might not be as algorithmically drawn to this content -- folks who might miss the nuances or the dog whistles elsewhere, if nothing else because of the way language and symbolism changes so rapidly in digital media. Folks with different reference points. There's a vibe-check process that can be hard to articulate. Thanks for bridging the gap with plenty of wisdom and compassion. We don't all see things so clearly or speak so well, least of all in this very long and dark era.
Just wanted to say that, seen from France, where the team finally found the manpower to translate your videos, you’re doing a tremendous job. Keep up the good work.
Some websites have pretty broken moderation. Like once a subreddit mod goes on a powertrip the community can't do much but migrate somewhere else, and 4chan mods are completely opaque in their activities. I've gotten really curious about what a democratic website would look like.
PSA: if you are attending a presentation such as this and asking a question during the Q&A that contains the words "in my opinion...", you're doing it wrong.
So many people wish they had given the talk, and decided to show it in their questions. Good job being patient and finding the core of what they were saying!
I would advocate for public ownership of all the social media platforms. These online spaces have come to hold the same position in our society as the Agora or town square. These platforms can be put into a public trust and regulation can be decided upon democratically and transparently.
But social media are international. And if non-US citizens participate, and they don't get a saying because it dries not belong to their government, I don't reckon that's fair.
@@Esmoxe Then perhaps we need a public international movement. Right now these platforms may be international but they are domestically privately owned. Right now decisions that have significant impact on the public are being made in private boardrooms. Jesus just look at what Facebook did in Myanmar or just look at how these platforms are facilitating and actively aiding the global rise of fascism. I don't know exactly how an international public ownership structure would work but I do know for a fact that it would better than what we have now
@@comradetrashpanda8777 I completely agree with you. I wasn't criticizing national public ownership as a defence of what we have now, which is just the worst, but just pointing out that that wouldn't be the solution either. We have to think of a new international model, which I think will be a very complex challenge (albeit a fundamental one), that many people will strongly oppose
Idk if Ian will ever see this, but I think his youtube channel kind of serves as an example on its own as a possible way to off board people from the alt right. The channel has very popular videos that discuss topics that are popular in circles that are often used as "recruiting grounds" for the alt-right. Specifically, I am thinking of the video on Smash Bros, which is the video that originally brought me to the channel since I like Smash Bros and UA-cam recommended it to me. The way Ian spoke about something (Smash) that I loved dearly myself made me really respect him and want to hear more from him, which made me much more open to his points on other videos he made, like his series on gamergate. I admit I always was left-leaning, but without the internet literacy I got from watching Ian's videos I may have found myself absorbing alt-right beliefs since my interests (video games and other "nerdy" subcultures and fandoms) often put me in way too close a proximity to the alt-right. Still, I like to imagine other smash fans, who may have otherwise been susceptible to alt-right "recruitment," found this channel through the Things of Beauty video, or any of the other videos on games, and have since then been kept from the alt-right. Tldr: I wish more content creators, who make good quality content geared towards nerdy subcultures and other circles known for breeding the alt-right, would both explicitly reject the alt-right and educate the viewers about how awful the alt-right is (just how I believe the channel Innuedo Studios has done just this)
Employers typically have policies around equality, diversity and mutual respect. A lot of 'lefties' dox alt-right types online and this can have the result of them losing their job. Is this a good strategy when it serves to isolate alt-right individuals further and for the situation to act as a kind of red pill, should employers instead have a kind of repent, reducation/rehab policy or programme? Would something like that work?
It's called a chilling effect, and I'd say yes, considering how abhorrently they behave when they think they have security and power. Incidentally, these are the same tactics the alt right employs, and it works for them, so what's good for the goose...
Around the 10-minute Mark the answer is armorall you know that thing you use to clean your dashboard and wheels.it was once made with an alcohol base so if you stop using it it would dry out everything your dash and your wheels destroying them. You either had to buy more armor all or watch your stuff be destroyed . The thing that makes it look better also makes it worse.
I think you were 100% backwards with "ignore them, we outnumber them, the good people come to us..." It's 50 years of ignoring the dummies, the people who make bad arguments, the people who are unpleasant, the people no one intelligent and educated would listen to that has gotten us to the cusp of Fascism and may push us over into something worse than you can possibly imagine. We have to care about how everyone is socialized. We have to care if EVERYONE has a place. We have to care how people think who aren't ever going to be sophisticated or bright enough for the subtle rules the Utopian left invents.
Diversity of Tactics is a good thing. I take it you're a fan of Vaush? If not, you might wanna check him out. Lets be real - on occasion, he says something kinda yikesy. And that means a LOT more people "flinch" when he ventures into verbally-graphic metaphor. And by flinch? I mean... most of the Left misinterprets what he said, out of habit from dealing with Chuds on twitter.
@@blackcat1642 call it "intellectual realism". Until we can raise a generation of kids with a real education? We have to account for the folks who are uneducated, and dont care to educate themselves. We need to include them in our world. Otherwise? We actually become what the Right-wing straw-mans us to be.
I agree. I grew up in a liberal state, in a liberal family, in a liberal community, with the vast majority of classmates also identifying as liberal, but I wasn't exposed to concepts like Peggy McIntosh's "Invisible Knapsack" until I went to University. Looking back, I could see how I could have half-believed much of the rhetoric the alt-right spews on the internet (I don't think it would have joined, though), had I not been armed with the knowledge I acquired at University. We can't wait until people are going to University to explain things like this, and we need to find ways to introduce these concepts in a way that doesn't require 1 hour of assigned reading, a 1 hour lecture, and a 30 minute discussion section. Otherwise, it shouldn't come as a surprise that these types of ideas will be confined to those who have a University education and become labeled as "elitist". Of course the average, non-college educated person in an all-white town in the midwest isn't going to side with the left under these conditions. Their only exposure to racism was in a high school classroom, where they learned how Slavery was ended in the Civil War, and how Segregation was ended when MLK marched on Washington. To them, anyone who is arguing about racism today is "stuck in the past", or even worse, is making excuses for their own moral failings. We write these people off at our own peril. This is the soil from which all right-wing hate groups have been sowing their seeds for decades, and it's going to get worse if caring about modern day questions of race, gender, etc. gets increasingly viewed as something only univerisity-educated professionals do.
18:40 The way I've heard it expressed is that decent/moderate people play within the rules, but the radicals will break the rules and argue the goals justify the means when it suits them. This gives them more room and thus more effectiveness even if they are the minority. Being the majority is not going to get you into power to solve any of this.
Re 12:00, I feel like you see a lot of that in Rojava. So many people in the region are so busy working with partisans and participating in civil society even tho it’s so ideologically diverse. You get very traditional people working with leftists and feminists and overtime, as they’re helping to build their community materially, the culture has changed remarkably, especially for women who have become active members of leadership and civil society
love your content, also love that you gave this talk to people who are older and may not understand the internet as well, i think a lot of people would brand these people as “liberals” but they want to help people as much as any leftist. glad you got to reach out to a different audience
I got an ad for an anti-trans movie from "epoch" talking about the harms of transitioning and how lgbt people influence kids to make "parents enemy number one" on this video 😒. For anyone who wants to debate me on this, look up a comparison of transition surgery regret rates versus all other medical surgeries. 1% regret rate for transitioning versus 22% of knee arthroplasty surgery
And even then, them transitioning might not have anything to do with them realizing they were wrong about their gender. It could be a multitude of other factors. Surgery gone wrong, an increase in harassment from transphobes (self fulfilling their argument), cost being too great and leading to bankruptcy or other traumatic events and many others On a sidenote, the thing I "like" about transphobes is that it's obvious if they care or not. Because their go to argument is that "we need to "protect" kids from making a mistake" but if that were true they would be helping and being kind to trans kids/people. The fact that they harass them and call the "mutilated sex freaks" and "sinful abominations" and so on immediately disproves the notion that their point is valid. And I think this situation is... how do you say... underrated? Not many other minorities have the luxury of their harassers being so obviously bigotted. Many others have a much harder time proving it due to the plausible deniability of the bigot's arguments. What I am scared about is that this is a limited time deal seeing as trans people are kind of new to the scene. I worry that as time goes on, the "arguments" made by transphobes will become harder to disprove at a glance. Like right now they're as weak as "oh but think of how many regret it!" Which, as you just said, is so incredibly few that it's not even worth bringing up and anyone doing so is obviously an uninformed bigot who has been fed misinformation. But I don't know if these arguments will stay. I hope so because unfortunately it's as privileged as the trans community will likely ever be. But that also mrans it can only go down...
Deeply impressed by your work thus far. Your audience asks, "how may we stem recruitment into the Neo-Nazi movement?" (I refuse to use the term alt-right, as Richard Spencer, may his face be eternally punched, coined it to rebrand Neo-Nazism.) Speaking from my experience, as you can see from my picture, I could be the poster-boy for blond, blue eyed Aryans if I chose. I am saved from such foolishness by being Irish, and knowing that hate groups historically called the Irish "white n_____s" (despite some Irish joining their movements.) More importantly, I don't self-identify as "white." In fact, I'd like the term to cease to exist. No European group sees itself as "white." They're Finns, or Slavs, or Britons, or Gauls, or whatever. I see "white" as a term conjured by slavers who preyed upon Africans, and nowadays a shorthand for someone influenced by the outdated ideas of the old Confederacy. By self-identifying as Irish and a target of bigotry, I'm far less susceptible. So I suggest raising children with a firm identity, one incompatible with Nazism -- "I AM this," rather than "I believe this." What you believe can change, but what you are cannot.
I guess he's just constantly talked about in my circles due to bullshittery he gets into every week so I assumed everyone internet savvy knows the figure.
Because the last time he actually did any research on PewDiePie was three years ago and solely from bad faith news sources that cherry picked everything. For a man who reads so much about his research you would think it wouldn't be so hard for him to actually sit down and watch some UA-cam for an afternoon.
19:05 You're on the right track, mate. And you actually showed a picture of the guy with a really good answer: Christian Picciolini. Give his Tedx a watch again, and zero in on the end.
Happy to see you change your mind on the appealing to 4chan crowd. I mean in no way our comrades should suffer from it, but I think the possible harm from appealing to edgelords might be negated by keeping them separate from social safe-spaces. Kinda like a quarantine zone.
I think that with my future work I'm going to try to strike a balance between reaching into other demographics to radicalize them and making therapy videos for those of us on the left enduring regular mistreatment in our efforts. Thank you for the good work you do.
![ПОЛНАЯ ИСТОРИЯ ЭКЗОРЦИЗМА [Топ Сикрет]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/qBySr6Bt0B8/mqdefault.jpg)
Since no one asked about how disorganized fascists and cultists actually are, I'll just put it here:
The phrase "Hitler made the trains run on time" is comically false. The Nazi rail system was famously inefficient, with people reporting logjams of thousands of train cars. The phrase was originally "MUSSOLINI made the trains run on time," but the trains only ran on time because he diverted funds from other public services that became horribly inefficient. He focused on the trains to demonstrate Italian superiority, similar to Hitler's autobahn, and, like most such demonstrations, it was a facade. It didn't demonstrate the efficiency of fascism, it was one, single pocket of effective government, propped up by the whims of a dictator, and at the expense of other departments, and it lasted only until the dictator decided to focus on something else.
A professor in college showed me pictures of the Hitler Youths falling asleep in their seats because the Nazis required multi-hour meetings from 12-year-olds and didn't know how to fill the time.
The image of fascist efficiency is propaganda. Fascist governments are disorganized and chaotic, propped up by the ego of a paranoiac with more power than he knows what to do with.
The same goes for cults. One of the leading ways people exit cults is the cult simply falls apart under its own mismanagement.
Don't believe the hype.
Brazil's Bolsonaro comes to mind, encouraging fires to take lands from Indigenous Brazilians and blaming..... Leonardo DiCaprio for the fires.??
A short note on Mussolini and trains: the railway workers were one of the most unionized categories of workers at the time and one of the first acts of the fascist regime was to fire thousands of them right after getting to power in 1923. They had to rely on the army then to make the railways work since they didn't have enough railway workers.
And thank you for this answer as well.
@@danieleflorean7064 Fired unions? "BuT FasISm IS SoCIaLiST / LeFT-WinG!!"
Whether it be stop-and-frisk or the border wall, the right here in America values shows of strength and control over anything practical or efficient as long as they've been promised to support the "deserving" population who believe they're entitled to the American dream at the expense of the "undeserving" population who are leeching off their unclaimed greatness.
His ability to translate people's rants into an actual question and then answer it is pretty amazing.
This is truly impressive. I'm a fairly good public speaker, but I couldn't do nearly so well with the questions. I have asked people to restate in the form of a question.
He's so patient with all of them, too. They're all grandstanding because they have a microphone and an audience and he's trying to direct it back to a meaningful discussion.
I think its an academic audience, so yeah Academics tend to ramble and waffle. Being able to translate that into regular-folk language is kind of a key talent of public communication
@@shayneoneill1506 I didn't realize that could be an academic audience! Whoops. I guess the cynicism is starting to get to me.
@@shayneoneill1506 it's not an academic group, just middle-aged activists
Ian gets bonus points for not rolling his eyes while listening to 2-minute "questions" before responding with...."what was the question?"
Yeah, that was super weird that there were so many questions like that.
@@dynamicworlds1 - I don't think it's _that_ weird honestly. As the political landscape becomes more polarized and heated, it's difficult to find a place to speak your mind. Speak out in a group of friends and you suddenly find out one is a massive fan of Jordan Peterson and a closet alt-righter. So when they're at an event like this they're "safe" to get it of their chest among like-minded people. It's like an emotional support group, like AA, but for political anxiety. 🤷🏻♀️
it's also a matter of the individual's information processing type - eg i think in concepts and images, and to fully understand an idea i have to listen to it and also talk about it to properly store in in my brain. That means that i might have the concept of a question in my head, but i don't know exactly what words to use to express it until i've kind of spoken stream-of-consciousness for a little bit. there were a couple of people who seemed to be doing that here.
I've been in the situation of "Q" several times, and I recognise my earlier attempts.
You go to the seminar/lecture and have what you think is a clear idea (and sometimes it really is a clear, easy to follow idea) but when it's time for Q&A you start to have doubts that the person will be able to follow your reasoning. So you decide to include that reasoning in your question, even though it probably would be better to ask the question, listen to the answer and fill in any blanks if needed/asked for.
@Suffer No Fools what
1:44 "But Plato said..."
_Instantly chuckles_
How he found the strength to not just dunk on this guy is beyond me.
Yeah, I think everyone was probably thinking "Oh boy, this guy is about to act like Greek philosophers are somehow an unimpeachable authority." All things considered, it wasn't as cringey as it could have been. He was more just making the point that even thousands of years ago people were saying that Democracy is vulnerable to being subverted by authoritarians, is the internet really anything new?
I could have gone off on how Plato also disliked democracy because it would logically grant rights to women and slaves, but that didn't seem constructive.
I had to chuckle more with the guy that began a whole history lesson on the Treaty of Versailles and the rise of the Nazi party. 😂
Plato politeia. Read it. Hoped the city metaphor goes on for 2pages. But no. And thought, aha, that's where all dictators got their ideas from. Actually reading Plato should rid everyone from trying to make arguments of authority about Plato.
An under-recognised talent is being able to turn a meandering question (sometimes it's just a statement) into a concise question and giving a thoughtful answer. There wasn't even any pauses! Good job!
TwistedEllipsis
Yeah I was impressed as well.
7:38 "Under no circumstances do I in any way support or condone anything that Hitler did... but!"
Props on keeping a straight face on that one.
Literally the worst thing to say😂 he should of just said if it wasn't him it would be someone else
Soooo... as an Autistic person who is also a leftist and has been called "a good ally" by LGBTQ+ people.... (I'm not sure how great an ally I actually am, tbh. I try. I really care more that there be more 'good allies' than be the only one 'cus that's sorta depressing, but anyway) I sometimes accidentally do this too...
If you look at what he asked afterward and parse the historical context to it was about economic anxiety and how Hitler claimed he could fix that if they would blame the Jewish people and elect him, and is that why people are attracted to the alt-right(?) which is what happened. And isn't controversial.
What the speaker has probably done is they got anxious and felt they needed to qualify it. Probably because they themselves also believe that economic injustice is a big problem and needs to be solved, but they are probably also worried about things being taken out of context and then they, themselves, being called supporters of Hitler. If you examine their full comment, you can tell their fear was unfounded, but in the person's head it was probably a legitimate fear.
For example, there was (and maybe still is?) a trend of calling leftists "fascists" and Hitler supporters despite that being patently false. But that trend can really get into our heads (to tie back into the last 3 videos, in a way that is very similar to abuse) and cause us to maybe believe it on some level. Especially those of us who might be isolated from others due to more noticeable abusive family or social situations and/or psychological conditions such as Autism and generalized anxiety disorder.
So the qualifiers happen because we're worried about being (falsely) compared to the people that we dislike (fascists). The qualifiers can and do frequently throw people off - but you sorta have to weed past them for at least a little bit to see whether what the person says after indicates that they're a person from the left who has been beaten down to much and is pre-emptively giving themselves an escape plan if someone starts insulting them (and or if they're just not great with words) or if they're an actual fascist trying to excuse Hitler.
The alt-right as an abusive relationship is real bruv.
@@petlahk4119 that's tru.
One of the things I've noticed about the internet in recent years is that people get really caught up in how things are phrased and don't bother to try and suss out what was meant. Communication doesn't work that way--It's a process filled with errors and it requires error-checking and TIME. I think the side effect is that only the simplest ideas survive because people are afraid to risk anything that doesn't fit on a bumper sticker. Fascists live and breathe on simplistic ideas.
TL;DR: Good comment. Thanks.
It's kinda like
I believe in free speech,but...
It's funny how the strategies you start outlining at 12:30 are very similar to tactics on proselytizing I learned as an evangelical kid. The whole idea of 'you can't convert by arguing', 'keep it on your perspective on life', & 'find out the actual root other's pain' were things I learned in mission school (& ultimately were the ideas about faith that turned me leftward). Even though the Evangelical establishment finds no use for this technique in the culture war, it's interesting how that personal connection seems to be most effective. (And I recognize how *privileged* a technique it is to employ.)
Evangelicals taught me everything I know about persuasion, and I will gleefully use their methods against them.
Tricksterbelle That’s interesting. I guess they really faced the same problem, how to appeal to someone without activating their resistance and pushing them away. Semantics in general is really fascinating especially when you think about how it has its roots in almost everything. Facts don’t just advertise themselves, they have to be presented in a way that people will listen to. Even in the sciences, new theoretical ideas may be right but they require advocacy to gain traction like how there is a variety of interpretations for Quantum Mechanics. I learned that from watching Sean Caroll who is an excellent physics communicator.
The reason I mention all that is because when you tell someone that semantics and rhetoric is a big part of politics they might think “so you’re basically manipulating people?”. But it’s not about lying it’s about deploying a line of communication in a way that people come to the conclusions your trying to express. We need good communicators on the left and also be constantly improving our skills.
I've always found it weird how a group of people that - from what I've often been exposed to of them - seem so given to strawmanning their opponents and been so confident in their obviously flawed arguments, could ever have any luck with going from door-to-door in their attempts to find converts.
If they know the techniques that actually work when persuading folk to convert, it's just really odd that they seem to express so little understanding as to, for instance, why most folk don't see secularism or consideration for non-Christian faiths as some "War on Christianity". Like, how do you earnestly believe this rubbish about the inherent evil in people who disagree with you, yet turn it off long enough to not piss them off?
@@thomasm.creamer2728 Yeah it definitely seems contradictory, and if I were to guess probably most Evangelical and highly religious people don't actually ground out there beliefs. This seems pretty intuitive for most of us on the left, so maybe the OP just got lucky with a highly competent mentor who taught them the same strategies that can be used against them. Also, being on the right as I assume most of those people are , they could be extra suseptible to using the argument styles that are so common among right wingers, pretty much bad faith and being uncritical and often contradictory in how they treat different kinds of information depending on whether or not it is consistent with their doctrines.
proselytizing is designed to look like exposure therapy but actually drive you back to the church|in-group. Every rejection / failure combined with the praise for doing the good work
@@thomasm.creamer2728 It's really simple. Most persuasion techniques have fuck all to do with reason and evidence.
Which is why they can sell you on magic.
Despite the utter lack of evidence for any of this stuff.
Under-credited: those excellent summaries of often wandering questions. :-O
It's incredible, he's a smart dude
Kinda mad you're not a stick figure but great video
Hes handsome ❤😍
Ian you are one of the greatest public speakers i have ever seen.
Q&A's are so hard to manage, and you made it look incredibly easy, from restating the question in a concise and accurate manner to making super relevant points that actually get to the heart of the questions asked.
BRAVO, SIR! Bravo.
I think you're giving far more forgiving to the Authorities and legal system @ ~15:45 than they deserve. More pointedly, you're ascribing to them the status of "unaware" about internet culture. As has been shown this past month where tons of people were arrested for online threats made against the police -- it's not that they don't know. It's that they don't _care_ when those threats are made against others. The moment the threat is made against them? Instant action. They just don't care enough to use their power properly.
It's the same dynamic when talking about men and consent. Think "non-woke" men don't understand consent? Throw a couple of homophobic ones into a gay bar with some bears and watch just how fast they demonstrate that they know _precisely_ what you're talking about.
I might
@Aru Gula - Oh look guys, this one thinks he's original and _totally_ didn't feel compelled by some inner tension to drop a red herring and miss the point.
@@smallpseudonym2844 It's noteworthy that they are so bothered by the example they want to redirect the topic and shut it down.
I think that illustrate your point about how aware and defensive people can be when it's their own boundaries.
@Aru Gula How do you beat Beaver Bother?
@Aru Gula As someone who's seen this shit happen many, many times, I can tell you that it's not even close to "hyper-specific". You wanting to ignore other people's experiences doesn't make them not real.
You should do a video on how the Nazis are not actually as organized as they like to project
Dan-O already did. ua-cam.com/video/jJ1Qm1Z_D7w/v-deo.html
@Aru Gula You tried so hard to make a gotcha that you ended up claiming that there have never been any Nazis ever. Good job. WWII disagrees.
"You tried so hard to make a gotcha that you ended up claiming that there have never been any Nazis ever. Good job. WWII disagrees."
HEYOOO. Excellent retort to that fuck head Aru.
@Aru Gula By this logic: does Communism also dosen't or never had exists?
Because that's not how political ideology works
And that is why the state shouldn't be isolated and take care of everything.
Great job. It's pretty difficult to present your research face to face to people who aren't active online and rooted in these sorts of discussions, and you explained it well. Also, welcome to my neck of the woods!
Yeah, that audience sounds and seems extremely boomer.
But having them start to understand the mechanics at play here is important and good.
I can barely teach my dad how to use his phone without wanting to pour gasoline on my head and drop a match, and yet this guy was successful in teaching a bunch of boomers how online hate groups gain traction.
@@araxiel569 The good kind of boomers though. There are definitely boomers on "our side"
When he talks about the year 2013, that's quite interesting because not only does that apply to the US, but it applies to the UK too
The EDL collapsed around 2013. Fortunately what we don't have here in the UK , is "the religious right" My parent's country (Pakistan) definitely has "the religious right"
Wow a lot of these "questions" were "Here is my option. oh and I guess some last second tacked on question to justify why i'm speaking."
More like. _"Here is my opinion." .. "Oh. A question?" .. "Er... Do you agree with my opinion?"_
@@TheMrVengeance yup. Biggest power move is asking what the question is.
It's crazy how often people don't understand that a Q&A is for Questions and Answers.
I see the critique, but as a person who has both asked questions at speeches like this and been the recipient of such questions, the format of the questions are (basically) appropriate. My reasoning is that it gives the presentor an opportunity to address *your" specific position and *your* specific response to her/his presentation. That being said, he did a great job feilding those questions. :)
opening it into a discussion where people express different points of view can be fun and enlightening anyway
I'm not even halfway through the video and I'm just phenomenally impressed with your composure and patience when people ask two-minute rambly "questions". Also, unrelated but your outfit is awesome and I dig it!
Yep
“but plato said….”
*can’t help but chuckle and then force a straight face*
PewdiePie revoking his donation to a Jewish charity and talking about it in a video where he's wearing an Iron Cross makes it very clear that at the bare minimum he's not that bothered by his fan base having too many alt-righters in it and is more than happy cater to them. It might still be a stretch to say that means he is definitely an alt-right racist himself but his actions make it less and less of a stretch.
Jesus he did that? My God. Can you link it?
@@whiteash2797 it's at the very start. Good on you for doing you research because it's WAY less sensational than it sounds ua-cam.com/video/PbfX3ZyHLJg/v-deo.html
He commited the mistake of scalating every single attack he recieved until falling into Poe's law.
@@poluicionador so creaming himself over 12 Rules for Life and following tons of alt-right figures on Twitter was part of a failed satirical performance? Seems like a stretch
@@Vontux It does? Compare to what?
You know he has a reason for the things he does, not saying it was a good reason .
...I've never realized how badly all Q&A sessions needed outro music...
On the second question, I think it's a little like Rugby. Primarily, each player is moving sideways, but the point is to move sideways and forwards. It doesn't have to be by a lot, it just has to add up to a lot.
We don't need the Wall Street Journal criticising Pewdiepie. We need the role models of the people following pewdiepie to be saying "that was not cool" and turn his fans against that sort of thing. Only problem is he's a brand on his own- he could lose 90% of his audience and still contribute millions of viewers to the alt-right. So cutting him off isn't necessarily an option?
Edit: looking snazzy- that's a cool tie
Neat seeing this guy on camera. Love the videos
I really like how kind you are. Not only is that good just because we need more people like that because we have so few but also it’s useful in political discourse. People are more inclined to listen and change their mind.
I would pose a follow-up question to that last question: how do you know when it's too late to "reach out" to someone? Because let's face it, a lot of these people have made up their minds. They're ready to reject the entire concept of us as people, let alone anything we have to say? How can we tell if someone is just a lost cause, unwilling to leave the space they're in and is actively hostile, sometimes violently, to anyone that might bring them out of it?
You can't. Because a firmly made up mind is a few experiences away from doubting those very beliefs. It''s a very subjective and personal thing. Also, many times, it takes the word of someone that's trusted or credible, that will be listened to in good faith, which then leads to being OPEN to a new idea or perspective. Just gotta keep your eyes open for it. Vigilence, my friend, and compassion. It's a long watch, but it's worth it.
@@Lailoken2 But that's the thing: a lot of these people _aren't_ going to listen to you, let alone in good faith. They come at you ready to dismiss whatever you say, looking for any small reason why. They've been programmed _not_ to trust credible sources if they contradict their worldview. Whatever doubt or cognitive dissonance they feel will quickly be corrected with some BS rationalization and they're protected from the truth once again.
I am not a patient person. I am not the type to risk wasting my time with such uncertain odds. If you think it's worth it, go ahead and reach out. But I can't be here gambling on some "maybe" all the time.
Not saying don't live your life, just keep that eye out for those that are reachable. And yes, some are gonna be ready with a shield. But you can't tell how strong the shield is. And mainly, when it's thin, it dissolves after the convo, when you are gone and they are thinking about what you said. That sucks for you in the moment, because you don't get to see the work you put in pay off directly. But the next person will, and maybe they come back to you. Either way, it's worth the eye and the try. Because alternative is more of the same. And look how that's working out. Hard truths, man.
So Last Question Guy at one point ponders "do you think we [more lefty oriented people] should be trying to reach out to them? Not to sleazily recruit them into some movement, but..."
And this kind of way of thinking makes me think a lot of Emerican Johnson. One of the things he hammers on very strongly all the time is actually in regards to how we are taught to see and think of politics and propaganda as "dirty words" and that marries into a lot of the right's rhetoric. Socialism is "ideology", neoliberalism is "human nature".
And this kind of thing gets repeated in various forms. At the same time they're shifting the Overton window, masquerading their tactics and attacking the left. Emerican's response to this is to just come with a hammer and a megaphone to very subtly proclaim things like "being a leftist means you oppose capitalism" and "yes, we are propagandists. That's what we're doing here [on non-compete], we're here to explain and try to sell you leftist politics and ideology".
And I actually think that when you look at people like Last Question Guy, it shows why. Yes people should be trying to recruit them into a movement, but there's nothing "sleazy" about it necessarily. Movements aren't dodgy by default, to paraphrase Dan himself, "the problem of the right is not that they work on beliefs, is that what they believe is a bunch of garbage".
If political thinking and action remains stigmatised, the right will continue pushing their own propaganda. After all, neoliberalism is already everyone's daily life, and increasingly so.
Everything is political, and all politics are personal.
thank you for all of your hard work. to the what do we do about it question, I'd say you're doing it right now. can't fix a problem if you don't know it exists. I think that's especially true with how adaptable fascisim is.... THANK YOU!
I love how all the old people think you're so funny and edgy. Loved the video tho, keep it up!
Please don't be so harsh to these people, everyone. They are forming the questions as they speak and it can seem a little ranty, but they're just trying to present the position from which they're actually asking their question. It's not concise, so what? They didn't have time to think things over and form a nice, precise query. That is how our minds work.
Also, they might not completely understand the Internet and social media of today but have probably invested much more time and commitment in actual activism in their lifespan than most of us ever will. Be kind and understanding, like Ian was. We need more of that in the world. And many of us here failed to show this a little bit.
Yeah, he's stated that this is a forum of middle-aged activists.
My conjecture from that is that they have more basis in philosophy and being in public events, but not that much experience with the internet.
I think it's necessary for them to voice their questions on it, no matter how meandering, since the point of having Ian there in the first place is teaching and informing them about how the ideology they've been fighting for the past like 20+ years has evolved.
Why do you think they didn't have time to properly construct their questions? They just watched an entire presentation, and in some Q&A situations (not sure if this was similar) they have to stand up and wait in line to get to the mic and ask their question. That seems like plenty of time to think about what you want to ask...
That dead eyed thousand yard stare Ian is giving @ 8:00 as the guy makes the "economic anxiety arguement" is a whole mood
The stuff about the Versailles treaty being this massive unpayable economy ruining debt is also not true, ask historians on reddit has has some good discussions on this: www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/agk02r/according_to_some_badhistory_posts_the_treaty_of
"Economic anxiety" as an argument by itself is self-defeating. It's basically conceding that any white person who's mildly inconvenienced will have no choice but to drive head-first into fascism by nature.
@@NRobbi42 well said Sir. I am also currently experiencing economic anxiety but am not trying to murder brown people, so I am either bad at anxiety or MAYBE there is something else going on here? I wonder what that could be?
@@NRobbi42 That's not true at all. The argument is that economic anxiety pushes people who are already somewhat sympathetic to fascism over the edge. It exacerbates what's already there, like smog triggering an asthma attack.
@@deadeaded That's why I said "by itself". Some often claim that otherwise decent people are being _tricked_ into fascism by spooky billionaires exploiting their fear of being impoverished when the reality is just as you said.
Great talk and great Q&A, Ian. You were one of the first lefties I watched after hbomb, good to see you giving talks and spreading ideas!
He’s so sweet🥺🥺🥺🥺🥺💛💛💛💛💛
Agreed.
ALL war is Class War, because Intersectionality Matters. As does Coalition-Building.
Solidarity forever ✊
Holy hell how do you not blow your brains out to get away from Q&A sessions like this
I love that people come out to these sorts of speaking engagements... but when the Q&A sessions start, I have to wonder if most of the people taking the mic understand the concept.
In theory:
1) Question.
2) Answer.
In practice, apparently:
1) "It seems in my opinion that we are sliding towards a berpity herpdy derp provoked by the insistence and persistence of toxifying shmoopy doop, therefore catalyzing the innate acquiescence heretofore thereby... *10 minutes later* ...when in fact the causation of such yarpy flarp can be attributed to capitalistic underpinnings not unfamiliar to the current structures."
2) "...okay, so I think the question was..."
I notice that there are already dislikes. I clicked into this video less than twenty seconds after it was posted. This is the exact trends this channel discusses, where people are obviously subscribed, obviously following, and making an active effort to undercut the value of this content (In the eyes of a potential audience) by downvoting without ever listening to a word that's being said.
Apparently downvotes actually helps videos, because it counts as "engagement"
@@peterprime2140 I'm a social media consultant by profession, generally clients don't count negative sentiment in high regard. 😜 But you're absolutely right, downvoting doesn't really do anything as far as the UA-cam algorythm is concerned. It may affect how audiences view content, though, so I'll edit my original comment to make it a little clearer.
Thank you!
Peter Prime is right.
Upload 2 videos of the same video.
Same length. Same video. Same everything.
Click dislike on one video. Leave the other video alone. Ex em both out and then search for the video... Guess which one pops up first? The disliked one...
Ian, you did a great job articulating yourself so well, here. In particular, summarising the statements of the audience members into questions. I'm delighted to support you as a patron now.
Bro just gotta say I love your content and it never clicked with me that you were the guy who also made the smash spectator sport video. Just when I thought you couldn't get more relatable and cool, my brain says "they sound simmilar, wait a minute..."
dang yo, you present your answers so well
Here’s a question: alt-rightists often seem to blame - let’s say ‘wokescolds’ - for their move to the right. The narrative seems to be that they encountered people with an outlook they were unfamiliar with, said some things they didn’t realise were offensive, asked some questions, or raised what they considered to be good-faith points of disagreement, and got totally blasted for it - leading them to feel that the right was a better option because they wouldn’t get their heads bitten off for minor linguistic offences.
So: how much truth is there in that? On the one hand, yeah, there definitely are people who flame other people in the name of the left or liberalism, and they can be very alienating. On the other hand, not everyone reacts that way to being flamed, and it’s a very convenient narrative for blaming the existence of the alt right on the left. How much of it is truth, would you say, and how much is propaganda?
I think it's intellectual laziness on people who don't want to have their views challenged, or even do the bare minimum amount of work to try and find out why some people might have a problem with something they said.
Like, I didn't know a lot about Trans people before I went to college, and I had some painfully centrist takes on things that caused me to be fairly insensitive at times. I could have just gone on whinging about "snowflakes" or such nonsense, but I think listening to what others have to say, in full, without been mediated third-hand by bad-faith actors who condone horrendous things, did me a world of good.
I feel like those are two party-line answers, one from the right and one from the left, neither of which really engages with the point.
I’m not gonna bother with Aru Gula because that individual is all over these threads doing that, but Thomas M. Creamer ... The question isn’t ‘Shouldn’t they react differently?’, that’s kind of a given. What I’d like to know is how accurate a claim it is that wokescolding drives people right, because if it is, then unwelcome as it might be to hear, that’s actually useful information that could be learned from. If it’s propaganda, on the other hand, then it’s not. We need a reasonably clear answer on the question of whether it’s true before moving to the conclusion that it’s still their fault. That’s actually accepting their framing, which I don’t think we have to do.
Sorry, mate, I’m not trying to scold you! But I do think that you’re leaning towards answering a question about the facts as if it’s a question about relative virtue, which is not really the question. It’s not about who’s the better person, it’s about what does and doesn’t produce a good result.
@Aru Gula And I could simply and honestly say the same of the Right - it honestly wouldn't be that hard to find examples.
In my personal experience, conservatives didn't seem to have a lot of curiosity about why some folk end up on different paths in life - things like why some identify as LGBT or Feminist to more existential questions about why some become homeless, or become addicted to some substance. The approach always seems to be that any "deviant" characteristics represent failings by individuals who made dumb decisions for dumb reasons which have no wider societal explanation.
It did always strike me as irrational to assume that LGBT people or women would "pretend" that their adverse personal experiences don't exist, just by virtue of the huge backlash any of them get whenever they challenge the narrative that we live in some inherent meritocratic world, or if we didn't, that they somehow deserve worse lives for the crime of losing the birth lottery.
It also seemed ridiculous to attribute poverty to laziness - when, in fact, there is little inherent link between how hard people work and what they actually get in return, rents have a habit of increasing by rates that far surpass wage growth, and we have an odd situation where people can apparently vote on policies as complex as international diplomacy, but yet the idea of them having a similar say in their own workplaces is considered anathema to the powers that be.
Considering the callousness of the system defended by the right, which inherently delegitimises people's experiences and struggles and shows utterly no compassion for the consequences of maintaining such a status quo, I can't honestly see a good reason to trust why the Ben Shapiros of this world, whose idea of debate is shouting down college students in front of a jeering audience, would have any contributions to make to the real problems our world is facing into.
The Left actually has discussions on things like Climate Change (and the potential consequences that will have down the line in terms of climate refugees, energy transition, etc.), homelessness, health and education access, workplace empowerment, public transport, etc.
The right pretends those problems don't exist, proposes solutions that makes them drastically worse, and somehow expects me in turn to be a lot more concerned about not been able to say the N-word without any social consequences than about things that actually affect the lives of my family and friends.
@@kitwhitfield7169 That's fair - for what it is worth, a thing I notice is that the same people who complain about "wokescalding" makes the same complaint along the lines of "OMG, you can't say a word nowadays - I'll think what I want, and you can fuck off" even if you so much as ask them to consider whether it's a tad extreme to be attributing a terrorist attacks to allowing any Muslims to immigrate into the country. I don't doubt that some well-intended folk fall into the "wokescalding" category, but at times, it seems like people are primed to storm off in a huff about "liberals shouting over them" no matter how you word the disagreement.
Maybe that's just the kind of folk I met in my life that are that over-sensitive, but I think it is worth bearing in mind.
Thomas M. Creamer I don’t doubt it, but then, if someone’s already acting that way, then you can assume they’re already primed. This isn’t exclusive to the alt-right; many online communities develop hair-trigger habitual responses, and if someone’s alt-right it’s a safe bet they have a high water-table when it comes to stress.
What I’m wondering about is the starting point - which, of course, is likely to be different for different people. Once someone’s already cussing people out, odds are they’ve been around a while.
(Also, if you haven’t met ill-intended wokescolds who just like bullying people and feeling righteous about it, well, I have. They’re a minority, but let’s not pretend any one political position has a monopoly on bellends! And then there’s people who aren’t intending to be mean, but who’ve been through too many flame wars and are short-fused as a result, who have, let’s say, lost sight of their good intentions. I don’t think we get anywhere assuming good intentions are the only thing that ever happens on the left.)
"Is he smart enough to do any of this on purpose?"
I want to say no, but honestly, I can't even tell anymore... maybe that's the point? :o
Yup, that's the point. It was also the point with Dubya. You can get away with a lot more if people think you do it because you're stupid than you can if they think you do it because you're evil.
It doesn't really matter. Look at the effects and consequences rather than trying to gauge the intent.
@@bravetherainbow it is surprising. The amount of times we were told "actions speak louder than words". If you look at the voting records of Conservatives in the UK, it's remarkably easy to disseminate their true feelings. "We believe in equality of sexuality" says the Conservative who voted for bills that would stymie the rights of the LGBTQ community, just because they want votes.
Actually, you can say that about the political Left as well. Plenty of times their records don't reflect their words. We really do need to start following policy and not people.
@@bravetherainbow
To some extent, it does matter, but either way they should be fired.
Woah I'm genuinely impressed with this video. I generally don't find q&a vids very useful or interesting but there is some genuine insight for my day to day interactions. Thanks for posting
Love your stuff. I’m really feeling the parasocial relationship after watching all of your content. You have a Discord or anything of the sort?
I have a Patreon gimme that cheddar
@@InnuendoStudios I have swiss and camembert will that do
@@InnuendoStudios This is so out-of-character from my parasocial relationship with you.
On talking about what life is like from a leftist perspective: this is true, and I think a lot of liberals, especially older ones, don’t understand this. My boomer liberal parents held strong to the idea that talking about politics is somehow gauche or bad manners. The problem is (as it is with many instances): the Right rarely holds themselves to the same standard, and it doesn’t take long for a conservative to unashamedly start ranting about how Obamacare is communism at the slightest provocation.
I’m a leftist and a DSA member, and importantly: my non-political friends know it. I talk all the time about my perspective on issues. And yes, I’ve seen results (one of my friends went from complaining about SJW’s in 2017 to reaching out to me unprompted to ask how he could phone bank for Biden in 2020. I never told him to do that; all I did was talk, and he found his way to me eventually).
Love the tie
I think the most useful question was the last one because this is basically "the 4Chan problem" ie this is where being angry, confused and horny likes to congregate and there is a point in life where that's actually normal: adolescence. I think "trusting 4Chan" to normalize your sons is as bad an idea as taking panal as a basis for exploring sex.
Don't let your sons be taught about PoC's, sexual minorities, and self-esteem by recreational sociopaths. Somebody should also get on considering an alternative as the better things about a Chan board are their creativity and freedom of non-hate-based expression (I swear that was _once_ a thing.) A version of that model that allows porn, nerd fixations and anonymity but that steps on hate speech might work. I remember a few old timers who weren't comfortable with n-bomb "jokes" and who are possibly a model for something like 4Chan but not drowning in fascist opportunists and mutually enabling edgelords.
This is also called "The Free Marketplace of Ideas" and we know that's a bad idea. So yeah, Lefties? Get on this shit.
@@marcgottlieb9579 I guess the Jews must have taken your reading comprehension since you decided that this comment was a good place to advertise your Q garbage.
Maybe that's what makes Natalie so effective, she is an edgelady and works for a better future.
there were a couple of games that sprung put of 4chan a while back, right? im not hallucinating that??
@Aru Gula does it really matter in an enviroment where no one is even a little bit encouraged to respect each other? it always seemed uncivil to me and defending anything you say there always struck me as pointless.
@Aru Gula When a community is welcoming to both sheep and wolves all you get is wolves. 4chan has the most shallow idea gene pool on the whole internet.
Re: the question of decentralized networks and quick turnarounds for failed groups- Identity Evropa rebranding itself as AIM.
That's hideous, especially since the American Indian Movement already has those initials.
@@reveranttangent1771 I'm sure they would see that as a win-win
@@chrimigules sadly true.
@@reveranttangent1771 Oh, don't think that version of AIM hasn't filed actions against these ding dongs.
@@HunterLyonIsAPerson that warms the cockles of my heart
Thank you for using the word "hoard" at 10:04. I've thought so too.
blindly furious that i GO TO SCHOOL IN LOWELL and i had no idea you were in the GLA or doing this talk !!!
That bit at the end where he effectively says 'elevating people on the left and recruiting people from the right are both important and can both be done in tandem' really illustrated for me what I love about being a leftie
The right often frames decisions as one or the other where in the left things are more often seen as some version of both of these things are worth doing so let's figure out how to make that happen, which is often much closer to the actual minutia of the decisions the right 'forces'
I just ran into this when somebody replied to a comment I made on a friend’s post. They admitted to being a libertarian, which I later described as “lite-beer republicanism”, because all libertarians do is complain about problems without suggesting solutions. When he did point out that he had offered A SINGLE solution (allow schools/teachers to arm themselves) I pointed out how, conveniently, he will only ever offer criticisms of left talking points that he “can’t see” helping the problem, but how he jumped on “arming teachers” as the “obvious” solutions.
I’ve seen people on the political left suggest a variety of solutions - Gun safety legislation, mental health services, healthcare reform, social safety nets - but people on the political right just don’t. They believe these issues can only be solved by singular, monolithic, mutually exclusive, solutions. These topics aren’t complex issues that should be understood and solved as such, they are singular and simple entities to be combatted by “morality” and “personal responsibility” and, yes “guns, obviously”.
If someone makes you question, "Are you smart enough to be that bad," the answer is "yes, yes they are."
this is the opposite of the truism "never presume to be malice what could also be explained by stupidity." but the real question is, does anybody willingly do evil? that's the difference between evil and stupidity isn't it, it's whether you know what you're doing. however, don't most evil people believe their actions to be in service to some sort of good? In that way, the evil are morally stupid, they do not know the good, because if they knew it was evil, they probably wouldn't do it.
@@ByzantineDarkwraith most evil people use incompetence as a shield to deflect scrutiny.
"Evil comes from a failure to think. It defies thought for as soon as thought tries to engage itself with evil and examine the premises and principles from which it originates, it is frustrated because it finds nothing there. That is the banality of evil."-Hannah Arendt
@@zerarch77 Not even remotely close, violence and rage are not evil. those are caused by a lack of thought, but evil, evil has to be calculating by its nature.
@transylvanian I am aware. I disagree with "...actions were motivated by a sort of stupidity which was wholly unexceptional." It's more, "Actions motivated by wholly unexceptional reason, disguised to appear as a form of stupidity."
Hope you make more talks like this, love all your videos!
In the future, pleas remember to repeat questions into the mic for the recording.
I thought he was really good and pretty consistent about that...
Yeah, pretty sure he did that for every question...
Maybe he should write them down with a time stamp in the description? Just an idea.
He didn't quite make it on the first question, though the question was clear from context. Kinda hard to repeat a lot of these questions, too, when it's someone dropping their whole dissertation on how the modern US mirrors 1930s Germany.
It's heartwarming and motivating to know that the creator of this really impressive channel is taking his expertise and speaking to rooms of folks who might not be as algorithmically drawn to this content -- folks who might miss the nuances or the dog whistles elsewhere, if nothing else because of the way language and symbolism changes so rapidly in digital media. Folks with different reference points. There's a vibe-check process that can be hard to articulate. Thanks for bridging the gap with plenty of wisdom and compassion. We don't all see things so clearly or speak so well, least of all in this very long and dark era.
I cannot express just how happy it made me to hear Forest Crunk at the end 💖💖💖
Just wanted to say that, seen from France, where the team finally found the manpower to translate your videos, you’re doing a tremendous job. Keep up the good work.
the audience seemed really engaged, you really did nail it
Some websites have pretty broken moderation. Like once a subreddit mod goes on a powertrip the community can't do much but migrate somewhere else, and 4chan mods are completely opaque in their activities. I've gotten really curious about what a democratic website would look like.
I think that it would look like real democracy. Fine up until a certain amount of people, then a slow unsatisfying process
Hexus forums went a bit that way too with brexit, and racism
PSA: if you are attending a presentation such as this and asking a question during the Q&A that contains the words "in my opinion...", you're doing it wrong.
I love it when you invite questions and get loads of people sharing their opinions instead!
So many people wish they had given the talk, and decided to show it in their questions. Good job being patient and finding the core of what they were saying!
7:45 "In no way do I support anything that hitler did- BUT" idk how you kept a straight face once bro said BUT omg I'm crying
I would advocate for public ownership of all the social media platforms. These online spaces have come to hold the same position in our society as the Agora or town square. These platforms can be put into a public trust and regulation can be decided upon democratically and transparently.
But social media are international. And if non-US citizens participate, and they don't get a saying because it dries not belong to their government, I don't reckon that's fair.
public ownership of a global phenomenon?
@@Esmoxe Then perhaps we need a public international movement. Right now these platforms may be international but they are domestically privately owned. Right now decisions that have significant impact on the public are being made in private boardrooms. Jesus just look at what Facebook did in Myanmar or just look at how these platforms are facilitating and actively aiding the global rise of fascism. I don't know exactly how an international public ownership structure would work but I do know for a fact that it would better than what we have now
@@comradetrashpanda8777 I completely agree with you. I wasn't criticizing national public ownership as a defence of what we have now, which is just the worst, but just pointing out that that wouldn't be the solution either. We have to think of a new international model, which I think will be a very complex challenge (albeit a fundamental one), that many people will strongly oppose
Rory Saurus you hear about that Gutenberg guy? We certainly can’t go around letting people have access to dangerous knowledge.
what a beautiful choice of tie
im not even done with the first one yet
I'm just here to say that this tie is phenomenal
Idk there is something so beautiful in this dude and his work
Idk if Ian will ever see this, but I think his youtube channel kind of serves as an example on its own as a possible way to off board people from the alt right. The channel has very popular videos that discuss topics that are popular in circles that are often used as "recruiting grounds" for the alt-right. Specifically, I am thinking of the video on Smash Bros, which is the video that originally brought me to the channel since I like Smash Bros and UA-cam recommended it to me. The way Ian spoke about something (Smash) that I loved dearly myself made me really respect him and want to hear more from him, which made me much more open to his points on other videos he made, like his series on gamergate. I admit I always was left-leaning, but without the internet literacy I got from watching Ian's videos I may have found myself absorbing alt-right beliefs since my interests (video games and other "nerdy" subcultures and fandoms) often put me in way too close a proximity to the alt-right. Still, I like to imagine other smash fans, who may have otherwise been susceptible to alt-right "recruitment," found this channel through the Things of Beauty video, or any of the other videos on games, and have since then been kept from the alt-right.
Tldr: I wish more content creators, who make good quality content geared towards nerdy subcultures and other circles known for breeding the alt-right, would both explicitly reject the alt-right and educate the viewers about how awful the alt-right is (just how I believe the channel Innuedo Studios has done just this)
this is so awesome! I wish I could have been there? Where is this?
Connie Lewis Lowell MA
can you address in a future video the extent to which "alt" still belongs in "alt-right"?
Jack Darcy the alt right is an *alternative* right wing position to mainstream conservatism?
@@1MSubsNovideos Not so much in beliefs, but in branding.
Employers typically have policies around equality, diversity and mutual respect. A lot of 'lefties' dox alt-right types online and this can have the result of them losing their job. Is this a good strategy when it serves to isolate alt-right individuals further and for the situation to act as a kind of red pill, should employers instead have a kind of repent, reducation/rehab policy or programme? Would something like that work?
It's called a chilling effect, and I'd say yes, considering how abhorrently they behave when they think they have security and power. Incidentally, these are the same tactics the alt right employs, and it works for them, so what's good for the goose...
Hey Ian! I live south of Lowell and am wondering if you’ll have any more lectures in the area that one could attend!
Nothing planned.
What a great ending to the video.
HAY look who it is!
Around the 10-minute Mark the answer is armorall you know that thing you use to clean your dashboard and wheels.it was once made with an alcohol base so if you stop using it it would dry out everything your dash and your wheels destroying them. You either had to buy more armor all or watch your stuff be destroyed . The thing that makes it look better also makes it worse.
This was enlightening man, thanks :)
Btw bro your ability to immediately recapture the essence of the questions and directly respond accordingly is impressive!
I think you were 100% backwards with "ignore them, we outnumber them, the good people come to us..." It's 50 years of ignoring the dummies, the people who make bad arguments, the people who are unpleasant, the people no one intelligent and educated would listen to that has gotten us to the cusp of Fascism and may push us over into something worse than you can possibly imagine.
We have to care about how everyone is socialized. We have to care if EVERYONE has a place. We have to care how people think who aren't ever going to be sophisticated or bright enough for the subtle rules the Utopian left invents.
Diversity of Tactics is a good thing. I take it you're a fan of Vaush? If not, you might wanna check him out.
Lets be real - on occasion, he says something kinda yikesy. And that means a LOT more people "flinch" when he ventures into verbally-graphic metaphor. And by flinch? I mean... most of the Left misinterprets what he said, out of habit from dealing with Chuds on twitter.
Why are vaush fans all like this
@@blackcat1642 call it "intellectual realism". Until we can raise a generation of kids with a real education? We have to account for the folks who are uneducated, and dont care to educate themselves. We need to include them in our world. Otherwise? We actually become what the Right-wing straw-mans us to be.
I agree. I grew up in a liberal state, in a liberal family, in a liberal community, with the vast majority of classmates also identifying as liberal, but I wasn't exposed to concepts like Peggy McIntosh's "Invisible Knapsack" until I went to University. Looking back, I could see how I could have half-believed much of the rhetoric the alt-right spews on the internet (I don't think it would have joined, though), had I not been armed with the knowledge I acquired at University.
We can't wait until people are going to University to explain things like this, and we need to find ways to introduce these concepts in a way that doesn't require 1 hour of assigned reading, a 1 hour lecture, and a 30 minute discussion section. Otherwise, it shouldn't come as a surprise that these types of ideas will be confined to those who have a University education and become labeled as "elitist".
Of course the average, non-college educated person in an all-white town in the midwest isn't going to side with the left under these conditions. Their only exposure to racism was in a high school classroom, where they learned how Slavery was ended in the Civil War, and how Segregation was ended when MLK marched on Washington. To them, anyone who is arguing about racism today is "stuck in the past", or even worse, is making excuses for their own moral failings. We write these people off at our own peril. This is the soil from which all right-wing hate groups have been sowing their seeds for decades, and it's going to get worse if caring about modern day questions of race, gender, etc. gets increasingly viewed as something only univerisity-educated professionals do.
America’s always been a lost cause if you ask me. It’s only now the people who tried to convince me otherwise have started to see it..
18:40 The way I've heard it expressed is that decent/moderate people play within the rules, but the radicals will break the rules and argue the goals justify the means when it suits them.
This gives them more room and thus more effectiveness even if they are the minority.
Being the majority is not going to get you into power to solve any of this.
Re 12:00, I feel like you see a lot of that in Rojava. So many people in the region are so busy working with partisans and participating in civil society even tho it’s so ideologically diverse. You get very traditional people working with leftists and feminists and overtime, as they’re helping to build their community materially, the culture has changed remarkably, especially for women who have become active members of leadership and civil society
Daaang I never expect to see stuff in the Merrimack Valley
1:52 warmed my heart
Some subtitles for the questions would've been nice.
Getting ads for both Donald Trump and Ted Cruz while watching this was... unfortunate....
Hey, does someone's knows why the 'Lady Eboshi is wrong' video is no more on UA-cam? What happened?
Bonus points on the Video from me for the Aesop Rock beat at the end
WAIT HOLY SHIT Forest Crunk by Aesop Rock??? your music taste is immaculate
of course the points are good but no one mentions the outro music
Wasn’t there a video of the presentation on here before?
At 6:58 I deadass thought that was Jordan Peterson for a second
What was the debunking book? I need it
What happened to the seminar? I remember watching it?
I think it's still up.
Im in Lowell right now. No one told me there was a meeting.
love your content, also love that you gave this talk to people who are older and may not understand the internet as well, i think a lot of people would brand these people as “liberals” but they want to help people as much as any leftist. glad you got to reach out to a different audience
I got an ad for an anti-trans movie from "epoch" talking about the harms of transitioning and how lgbt people influence kids to make "parents enemy number one" on this video 😒.
For anyone who wants to debate me on this, look up a comparison of transition surgery regret rates versus all other medical surgeries. 1% regret rate for transitioning versus 22% of knee arthroplasty surgery
And even then, them transitioning might not have anything to do with them realizing they were wrong about their gender. It could be a multitude of other factors. Surgery gone wrong, an increase in harassment from transphobes (self fulfilling their argument), cost being too great and leading to bankruptcy or other traumatic events and many others
On a sidenote, the thing I "like" about transphobes is that it's obvious if they care or not. Because their go to argument is that "we need to "protect" kids from making a mistake" but if that were true they would be helping and being kind to trans kids/people. The fact that they harass them and call the "mutilated sex freaks" and "sinful abominations" and so on immediately disproves the notion that their point is valid. And I think this situation is... how do you say... underrated? Not many other minorities have the luxury of their harassers being so obviously bigotted. Many others have a much harder time proving it due to the plausible deniability of the bigot's arguments. What I am scared about is that this is a limited time deal seeing as trans people are kind of new to the scene. I worry that as time goes on, the "arguments" made by transphobes will become harder to disprove at a glance. Like right now they're as weak as "oh but think of how many regret it!" Which, as you just said, is so incredibly few that it's not even worth bringing up and anyone doing so is obviously an uninformed bigot who has been fed misinformation. But I don't know if these arguments will stay. I hope so because unfortunately it's as privileged as the trans community will likely ever be. But that also mrans it can only go down...
Deeply impressed by your work thus far.
Your audience asks, "how may we stem recruitment into the Neo-Nazi movement?" (I refuse to use the term alt-right, as Richard Spencer, may his face be eternally punched, coined it to rebrand Neo-Nazism.) Speaking from my experience, as you can see from my picture, I could be the poster-boy for blond, blue eyed Aryans if I chose. I am saved from such foolishness by being Irish, and knowing that hate groups historically called the Irish "white n_____s" (despite some Irish joining their movements.)
More importantly, I don't self-identify as "white." In fact, I'd like the term to cease to exist. No European group sees itself as "white." They're Finns, or Slavs, or Britons, or Gauls, or whatever. I see "white" as a term conjured by slavers who preyed upon Africans, and nowadays a shorthand for someone influenced by the outdated ideas of the old Confederacy. By self-identifying as Irish and a target of bigotry, I'm far less susceptible. So I suggest raising children with a firm identity, one incompatible with Nazism -- "I AM this," rather than "I believe this." What you believe can change, but what you are cannot.
Let them dubbed: "the alt-reich"
Yes, I've heard that as well. I'd accept this because, in the end, still calling them Nazis, which is what they are.
God that answer was so good regarding poverty and economic anxiety and radicalization
love this guy
wtf i love boomers now
"PewDiePie has over 50 million subscribers" is not technically wrong but why not say over 100 million?
Probably didn't have the figure in his head.
I guess he's just constantly talked about in my circles due to bullshittery he gets into every week so I assumed everyone internet savvy knows the figure.
I thought the same thing, maybe this was written or given before the T series subscription war?
Because the last time he actually did any research on PewDiePie was three years ago and solely from bad faith news sources that cherry picked everything.
For a man who reads so much about his research you would think it wouldn't be so hard for him to actually sit down and watch some UA-cam for an afternoon.
@@GPantazis pewdiepie is a racist deal with it
I wonder why i’m getting an ad about a Very Manly Man Pumping Iron Like a Badass
19:05 You're on the right track, mate. And you actually showed a picture of the guy with a really good answer: Christian Picciolini. Give his Tedx a watch again, and zero in on the end.
Happy to see you change your mind on the appealing to 4chan crowd. I mean in no way our comrades should suffer from it, but I think the possible harm from appealing to edgelords might be negated by keeping them separate from social safe-spaces. Kinda like a quarantine zone.
I think that with my future work I'm going to try to strike a balance between reaching into other demographics to radicalize them and making therapy videos for those of us on the left enduring regular mistreatment in our efforts. Thank you for the good work you do.
Can you please make a video about PewDiePie?