Small Addendum (which will only make sense if you watch to the end.): Never be ashamed of being afraid. Courage is acting despite being afraid, and courage follows from prudence and justice.
I've never truly understood the way ists and phobes are thrown around so loosely, which is one reason why I've lost interest in most things. I'm not necessarily afraid, more like knowledgeable that their ideas do not correlate within reality and I'm getting tired of it.
@@Skyler-Thorson "-ist" and "-phobe" is foul form of sciencism where someone is trying to bamboozle you with a "science-sounding" medical diagnosis for disagreeing with their opinion. Or to put it more simply: "you must be mentally-ill if you disagree with me" which is rich considering the people who like to slander with "-ist" and "-phobe" actively _celebrate_ mental illness.
@@Skyler-Thorson Progressives have always gaslighted, especially when it comes to masculinity and sexuality. They used to do it when they hated sports. If you watched football they would accuse the sport of being homoerotic and the fans of being closet homosexuals. Why? Because sports used to represent traditional America and the domain of manly men. Now that sports have been hijacked by progressive politics they don't do that much anymore.
This explains exactly why modern movies have no happy ending; why their plots are pointless, and resistance is futile. That's the lesson they teach: resistance is futile. Just obey.
Not to sound like I'm arguing, but I'll have to take your word on it as the last movie I watched in theaters was the first Avengers and I don't feel like I've missed out on anything Simply put, we have to be like RJ and make our own damm entertainment.
@@Theranthrope It's truly a shame. With movies etc. from the 80's and even 90's to some degree I had no idea what an artist/directors politics were just based on their work most of the time.
Remember the Borgs in Star Trek! "Prepare for assimilation! Resistance is futile!" The Borgs are a collective with drones and some queens. The drones are NPC and are only there to obey. What's been done to them is horrific but considered normal. I don't know who created them but they're a good analogy to the progressives. Between their appearance and now they went from an absolute threat to something normal. I saw them, I think, before Trump and now they are Biden.
Essentially stories inspired hope while propaganda invites despair. As long as you have a source of hope you can live on, which is why the powers that be is trying to crush any medium of hope to instill their despair.
I mean, they are filled with narcissism, hypocrism, villainy, stupidity and reeks of writers who think they are better than you when they clearly aren't. If they had kept the half-naked and skin tight suit women, one could at least have kept looking at them for the pictures while ignoring all the story and text.
I'd had Nihilism to that list...Almost every time. They love to blur the lines of "Good" and Evil" then somehow try to paint the "evil" characters as just being misunderstood.
That is why I am able to enjoy Ultimatum. Yeah the story is awful, but David Finch's art is beautiful so at least it is a shit show that is pleasant to look at lol.
@@bryan81584 To be fair, some of that seems to be born from the almost entirely feminine attraction to "the bad boy," and the concomitant desire to help/reform/tame him. Given that most fanfic writers are adolescent girls, this explains their adoration of antagonists and rivals to the protagonist, which also tends to correspond with self-indulgent shipping or self-inserts somehow. I suspect much of the corruption we see in media is due to hiring (intentionally or not) female writers who never matured past this self-indulgent adolescent mindset. While not necessarily deliberate iconoclasm (if anything, it seems more likely _that_ can be blamed on those who intentionally hire such immature writers), it would explain why so many projects devolve into scenarios devoid of struggle, chock full of sociopolitical text walls, and little more than the instant gratification of what women generally want (especially adoration and personal validation).
Well, this explains why I can't enjoy most of the so-called "entertainment" so-to-speak that these alleged, supposed "entertainers" are making, and selling in the "entertainment" industry. Every character that they expect the buyers of this "entertainment" to root for as the "hero protagonist" is, in actuality, an asshole. I can't find myself rooting for an asshole. That's not not someone to be revered. At least, not to me. But hey, people, despite everything that is plaguing us, do not despair. The Rippaverse has now begun. Prepare yourselves.
@@constantinwilliams9388 The Rippaverse is the independent comic book company founded by UA-camr Eric D. July, a.k.a. YoungRippa59. Check out his most recent videos on his UA-cam channel YoungRippa59 and he explains everything in detail about his own independent comic book universe with his own independent comic book super-hero characters where he intends to be and do way better than the soy woke S.J.W. "mainstream" comic book companies like DC Comics and Marvel Comics. He does not cater to the Politically Correct N.P.C. bullshit agenda that Hollywood is constantly pushing on Twitter.
The so called "hero protagonists" Hollywood liked to call them are what tv tropes call "Designated heroes", characters we're told they're the good guys and presented as such even though their actions says otherwise. That or the sociopathic heroes where they're messed up but the narrative doesn't pretend they're not
Ahhh... do you know what it's called when someone tries to make you numb to horror and disgust by subjecting you to it again and again? Brainwashing. They did it to Geordi in Star Trek: The Next Generation.
Remember that episode with Picard being interrogated with a zapper and lights? Picard always said there are 4 lights, but the interrogator wanted him to 5.
@@clintmatthews3500 Good point. One wonders why it wasn't hardened against external radio access. Of course Data was an even bigger security risk than the visor.
@@jaspermcminnis5538 What makes that even deeper is that he admits later that he WANTED to say there were 5, just to make the torture stop. But he refused to, both because that meant he would be giving in and because it wasn't true.
@@palladiamorsdeus This was in contrast with how he submitted to the Borg, simply because he lost his last family member and so desperately wanted to "belong" to a family again (despite Starfleet functioning like an extended family, which clearly contrasted that choice of dialogue).
The reason that "progressive" personalities are not repelled by disgusting things is that they are high in trait openness. They constantly seek out new experiences and knowledge. This desire is useful when grounded to an ethos. However, the progressive of today pushes this impulse to the degree of vice. It's the foundation of the liberation mindset and the desires to seek out and promote the "forbidden."
This is interesting. Personally I figure I've always had had a fair bit of trait openness. I'd hardly be considered a conservative, and have always appreciated things that are a bit "alternative". But I've always had a strong sense of disgust. Been repelled by "progressivism" since day one. I can't stand to even look at most movies and tv, even momentarily. Just flipping through netflix alone gives me a strange feeling of disgust.
@@mistersharpe4375 I'm also high in trait "openness," but I'm also high in conscientiousness and disagreeableness. It's a weird combo. I crave knowledge but I'm unwilling to compromise my beliefs.
@@Vesuya Oh that's a good point. I can't professionally assess myself, but I feel that I am undeniably high in disagreeableness. Otherwise, I'd have an easier time fitting in. I've often been accused of disliking everything that is popular in the mainstream, which I don't think I'm doing on purpose. Politically and religiously, I'm a strong proponent of freedom (and non-aggression). I'm no conservative, but being inundated with constant Leftist rhetoric has given the term "Liberal" a sour taste in my mouth.
Language is such a vital part of this subject. SJW‘s are always inventing new words, and redefining old ones. For example… The term cis. That word was invented because they could not abide the existence of the word “normal”.
Technically, the way they use it, it's more meant as a derogatory term in such a way that many normal people would think it's just supposed to indicate a difference in categorization, especially with the current expansion of biological sex and identity.
The erasure of boundaries, sabotage of function, denial of meaning and purpose. All these games do is spread pure linguistic chaos. And like the forces of chaos in ancient myth cycles, *they seek to destroy everything that exists.*
Likewise referring to people with normal sexual appetites as "straight" or "heterosexual" to imply it's equal somehow to being bent or homosexual or otherwise aberrant.
That was very lucid and timely. This tightens up the loose edges of my recent, (as of this year), deep seated decision to respond to certain "ista-phobe" accusations with, "Actually, yes, I'm scared. I have every reason to be. Here's why... (followed by a, "Why wouldn't you want me to fear ____? Are you trying to bring me to harm?" while eyeing them with theatrical suspicion.)
Islamaphone makes me laugh the most. I grew up in an era when they showed car bombings on a weekly basis done by extremist islamic forces so yeah, I'd say a bit of fear on that end is fairly well justified. Logically speaking I know its not all of them...but you have no way of knowing WHICH of them might ascribe to that level of cult behavior. It also doesn't help when you hear about the acid attacks that are becoming a constant problem in the UK either...
@@palladiamorsdeus Unfortunately for every one horrid act they do, the rest of us Muslims must perform 4 good actions to make up for the bad action of the one.
@@Darksky1001able I would settle for repudiating the moral example set by your leaders and your psychopath of a prophet. Even calling out mob violence, honor killings, FGM, persecution of dhimmis, maltreatment of women, encouragement of child marriage, encouragement of slavery, dehumanization of non-believers, destruction of monuments and antiquities, etc. would be a welcome change of pace. But no one in your community *_ever_* calls your fellow believers out. Instead, all I ever hear is silence or *gloating.* Even now, your preoccupation is not with the atrocities carried out in the name if your religion, but merely how those things make your religion look bad. Case in point, the recent attempt on the life of Salman Rushdie for writing a book that makes reference to the Satanic Verses. Despite the fact that the original Satanic Verses were not considered controversial for several centuries after they were recorded, they were only later marked as apocryphal when imams suddenly realized that *they brought the entire legitimacy of Muhammad's supposed prophethood into question,* as Mo supposedly mistook a revelation from Satan as coming from Allah/Jibril. *Not being able to tell the difference between the angel delivering messages from your god and the Devil is a very big deal; based on such a gross error, who's to say any of Mo's revelations actually came from Allah?* And all Rushdie did was _remind the Islamic world that those passages exist_ in a satirical book he wrote. Rather than grapple with the existential threat to their worldview (and thus force imams to give up their power), Islamists issued a fatwa against Rushdie. Rushdie came out of hiding after more than 30 years to give a symposium on the importance of free speech, only to get stabbed and lose an eye for his trouble. And how has your community responded? *_Celebrating in the streets with the same fervor they did on 9/11!_* The gloating and saying "he got what he deserved, Allah be praised" were near universal on social media. The only objections raised were those saying Rushdie *should have been executed by legal means in accordance with Sharia law,* ie their only (alleged) problem was the vigilantism; he still deserved to die for the blasphemy of insulting your so-called prophet, a prophet which your religion forces you to venerate even more than your supposed god (who's committing shirk, now?). I have not encountered a single one of your co-religionists unconditionally condemning the attack on Rushdie, and I have read enough of your "holy" books to know that Muhammad would have not only commanded the slaying, but would have condemned as cowards any [M-words] who didn't step up to take Rushdie's head _in his name._ For that matter, define "4 good actions" done in the name of Islam that somehow absolve any of the atrocities carried out in the name of Islam since its inception. Because I know enough about Islamic charities to know they either serve as fronts for [T-word] groups, serve to enrich the Saudi royal family, or only ever serve the interests of [M-words] while overtly avoiding helping non-believers.
@@palladiamorsdeus "Islamophobia" itself was a phrase coined by the Muslim Brotherhood to capitalize on the growing culture of political correctness in the West during the 80s and 90s. Its entire purpose is to stifle public discussion of Islam by insinuating that any criticism of Islam is rooted in bigotry. Given that the last few generations in Western countries have been largely ignorant of Islam and its tenets, most people bought the narrative, and Western leaders rolled with it (in spite of numerous [T-word] attacks) in order to maintain good relationships with Saudi Arabia and other Middle Eastern oil producing countries, all of which were predominantly Islamic and employed Sharia to varying degrees. Those who did try to raise serious concerns have been consistently ignored and deplatformed, while our political and media class have either stood by or piled on in order to avoid figuratively rocking the boat. "Islamophobia" redefines "poisoning the well."
The fact that woke movies are bad is enough, but it's the whole process behind it that disgusts me. You can make your fanfic about a gay nonbinary trans black Batman, but when the intent is to erase or undermine the original, that's when I start getting disgusted.
I believe they want to convince everyone there is no such thing as normal, because that would mean there would be no such thing as strange. Those two things would still exist, people just wouldn't be equipped with the vocabulary to describe them.
It actually goes deeper than that. They want to convince only THEIR interpretation of normal applies and should be accepted. Which clearly creates a conflict between their "we are all for choice", as long as you choose THEIR option as your only decision. :/
@@cheerfulsatanist Men being attracted to women and vice-versa is a universal normality. Humans believing metaphysical beings exist is a universal normality. Believing that repeating an action which caused an effect will have a repetition of the effect is a universal normality. Some things are subjective; both of our eyes may objectively see the same primary blue, but my subjective emotions may decide this blue is extremely appealing while yours might say the saturation is too high and be uncomfortable, or that it is too cold and you'd prefer a red or orange. That is how real subjectivism works; calling the blue orange just because you wish it to be so is not, nor is denying the existence of color just because you are colorblind. Relativity also exists. In an objective stance you, myself, and a rock may all be arranged in a row with the rock between us. To me, the rock is to the immediate East, then you the far East. To you, the rock is the immediate West and I am the far West. That is how real relativism works.
Congrats on getting close to 20k subscribers! As for the topic, fear and disgust are natural reactions to frightening and horrific things. It's part of how we not only grow, but how we know that something is wrong.
he is the one who explains deeply about entertainment in the west, especially comics, it is very rare for a channel like this to exist, others only make fun of progressive people but don't explain deeply with philosophy, because it is interesting but not popular, contains something deep, profound and interesting topics
I’m not necessarily disgusted by progressive stories but the attitude of the creators. That smug “I’m progressive, therefore I’m better than you” attitude is disgusting. I’m cool with new stories, progressive or not, just don’t be an asshole to your readers.
The problem with "progressive stories" are that they are DEEPLY dishonest, and are actually DELIBERATE based on stereotypes, with overblown, convoluted setups that are meant to strike at political rivals in not too subtle ways, not actually tell a story based on any kind of universal issue or value, which reveals it as the shallow propaganda it actually is. It's one thing if a storyteller wants to tell a story about compassion; it's another thing when said person is blasting "his/her preferred group of people to hate" on Twitter, while simultaneously lecturing you about morality and mercy. :/ Also, it doesn't help that people PAY them to keep up the fake mask of "caring", when the money is all they care about, and they make that CRYSTAL CLEAR. :/
I would agree - but these stories; what they view Good as, the boundaries that their “good” characters will and won’t cross, the values of their characters, etcetera, reflect their own morality. If someone makes Superman, the original paragon of virtue, a murderer, without any sort of ramifications or moral issues, then that implies that the author believes that murder is okay. Of course, most people know that Superman would never kill, and even in the rare stories that he does it’s universally painted as negative (“whatever happened to the man of tomorrow,” “Injustice,” etc.). Were someone to think that Superman would kill in all but the most severe circumstances, it would imply either a severe misunderstanding of the character or a deranged author.
@@obviouslykaleb7998 so by your logic, everything an author writes automatically means they also believe in??? I guess most horror directors are secretly serial killers or their groupies then.
Their stories may be intended to make their world view part of me, but, they inevitably fail because they suck at writing so badly. A good example of this was the latest (and hopefully the last) Charlie's Angels reboot. It tanked like an M1 Abrams falling into the ocean. Or Ghostbusters 2016. Or all the future MCU movies. My point being that they can intend to convert people all they want, but, someone has to actually be willing PAY to watch/read their poorly crafted stories to even hear their propaganda. They are failing. Across the board. Look at the movies. Look at the comics. Nobody wants what they're selling. The tide is slowly turning. At the same time, their replacements are in the wings revving their motors getting ready to roll out. You're working on your line. Eric July just released the Rippaverse. So my response is, let the mainstream continue to embrace this poison that is killing them. They've been creatively bankrupt for years. Even before the SJWs invaded. Its time for a new industry to rise. Viva la revolution.
Agree with every point you make. Just have to point out one small mistake: While St. Agustine wrote that critique of Stoicism, he was a Manichaen in his youth, not a Stoic. Though as a Roman he would have been very familiar with Stoicism.
Like YoungRippa says, they(leftiods) only find legitimacy in white male characters. Ms. Marvel becomes Captain Marvel, X 23 becomes Wolverine, Jane becomes Thor.
Have not read the comics, but X-23 could be considered something akin to a “slave name”. Something that is assigned to her and thus disagreeable. Like how Logan/ Wolverine would not like to be called Weapon X. Again have not read the comics so would not know how true this is. But I doubt any progressive writers to use common sense, since the NORMAL conclusion to this this logic train is get a normal human name like Chloe or Jennifer.
I'm reminded of a passage from "The Neverending Story:" "When it comes to controlling human beings there is no better instrument than lies. Because, you see, humans live by beliefs. And beliefs can be manipulated. The power to manipulate beliefs is the only thing that counts.”
The funny thing is, its crap cynicism. Like none of the characters are capable or believable to use power in a interesting cynical way. Tbh their characters feel like someone's dating profile rather than the actual person
I love being edgy and provocative, but more than that I love truth and justice. It tickles me to no end that presently, the best way to be edgy and counter-cultural is to simply have a story about a brave hero who aggressively and violently puts an end to the wicked with maybe a little blood or guts for verisimilitude.
The whole fight or flight thig when looking at images is interesting and puts a certain part of my childhood in perspective. When I was 7 I had no trouble playing the first Mortal Kombat game. I actually played it a lot and found it very fun. My parents even let me watch the movie and with the exception of Scorpions death and Shang Sung turning into a skeleton after his death I could easily look at the movie. However when I rented Mortal Kombat II I felt very uncomfortable playing that game. It's aesthetic, violence, and colors made it difficult for me to want to keep playing. After just a few fatalities and brutalities I stopped playing and never rented the game again. Kids at school would talk about Mortal Kombat II, 3, and Ultimate 3, but the most I did was look at the players guides. My friends dad also had Doom and I was able to play that with no problems either. It was just something about the way Mortal Kombat II and the later 3, and Ultimate 3 presented themselves that I could not handle. However when I was getting close to 10 a new friend I met at school had the games and talked about them often. When he came over to my house one day he brought his Mortal Kombat II and I was able to handle the game by that time.
You know what, I would have loved for X-23 to take on a hero name to honor her father Wolverine. She could have called herself "Honey Badger," and there's a lot of nice little jokes and puns you could make from that name alone, as well as some satisfying payoffs.
Some other Mustelidae with maybe cool names: Polecat, Pine Marten, Grison, Tayra, Stoat, Blackfoot(ed Ferret), Mink, Ermine. I think Polecat's my favorite, in a cheeky kinda way, given how the character's been treated at times.
First it would need to acknowledge that a dad did something worthy of being honored, and THAT position is not a favorable position to hold in current-day Hollywood, not to mention some "movements" would write ENDLESS articles on how women are negatively affected by a guy being acknowledged in any way whatsoever. :/
There are some subjective forms of disgust, and others which ate entirely objective. Disgust for rot, decay, and disease are objective, and not feeling it means something is wrong.
I would postulate that disgust for certain sexualities/sexual fetishes is objective as well and if there is no disgust for those things in someone, that also means something is wrong.
I think the 5% of the study where someone had a limited disgust response while still being conservative could be those in positions where they’ve become inured to the disgust. Like a surgeon who’s not squeamish while digging in some else’s intestines. It’d be disgusting for the average Joe, but obviously not for the doctor.
@@kitalalaris Particularly, everything involving the rectum/colon/anus/excrement. Including "normal" anal "sex" which pornography has sanitized and popularized. It's objectively disgusting and a big part of why until _very_ recently, most normal people had at least a bit of a disgust reaction to interacting directly with homosexuals.
Thank you for clearly warning us of the deplorably irrational aspects off this 'philosophy' very widespread around world thought in these years!!! I am inclined to think that we are also suffering from a drastic lack of people capable of philosophic thought on the good pattern set by such individuals as Aristoteles☹️
We need people to think logically and with common sense before they can hope to think of philosophy. I’ve seen people think that Karl Marx is a good ‘philosopher’ to follow, as if his policies haven’t killed millions every damn time.
To be honest, I no longer care what happens to the mainstream entertainment media. Let them immolate themselves. They aren't making something for me? Fine! I'll go support people who do make entertainment for me. I say again, they may have polluted every mainstream source of entertainment with their political venom, but, I don't have to partake. Neither do any of you. You have the option at any time to turn off the TV, cancel the subscriptions, and to support indie creators that respect you as the customer.
I think this explains why I don’t like Horror movies. I feel disgusted just as much or more then fear. I don’t get the thrill others do. And I think that is because I was not conditioned to it. And I don’t want to be. I wonder if the horror Genera was designed to do? Condition people.
Most scary movies nowadays are more slasher flicks than straight up horror. Original horror stories are Dracula, Picture of Dorian Grey, and Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. Disgust was part of horror, slasher films are gratuitous gore.
@@RoseBaggins looking back at old horror movies like Psycho, and the original Halloween there was hardly any gore in them, and they were still able to put fear and suspense into them. Modern horror has become too reliant on gore and violence, with no subtlety whatsoever.
The Horror genre doesn't condition anyone. It's literally the exploration of fear and phobias in all its dimensions and interpretations. If you use horror to condition people, you're LITERALLY doing it wrong. Also, it depends on what you mean when you point at "horror"? Not all horror is gore and blood, just like not all horror is even physical. If you think horror just means blood and body parts, you need to BROADEN your viewing knowledge of more kinds of horror subgenres. :/
Could you take a look at honkai impact? The game has a lot of things we could consider "woke", but it felt totally different from the "woke" shit we have. It also shows that themes that we consider "woke" could be used in a good story. I would like to see you compare honkai with a "woke" story and tell the differences between the two as they both use the same themes, but seem to use them in very different ways.
@@grandarkfang_1482 A gacha game, we only have female characters to play and almost all of them are gay or bi, male characters are most often antagonists or villains. The story is a little slow at first, but from chapter 7 onwards it gets much better. Despite being a gacha, you don't need to spend a dime and in the later stages you are given several rare characters to use in that chapter so you are never forced to spend money it was made by the same company that made genshin.
_Honkai Impact_ was made by socialists. It's an example of progressive people who do not yet feel confident enough to act openly, so they are still acting to cover up their ideas and employ them subtextually. RJ discussed this subject in his last video: ua-cam.com/video/wO0J50NRKjI/v-deo.html
@@glauberlopes1779 only having female characters to play happens purely because they want the characters to be attractive to their players. You're supposed to seek after and desire each and every character, even the ones which aren't very strong, it's literally the business model of a gacha. Most (popular) gacha games have mostly female casts, for that reason - because attractive female characters with likeable personalities appeal both to male and female consumers. As for them all being Yuri girls, that's not coming from a progressive place either, it's because that makes these characters more appealing to the fans (again, both male and female). Something about girls being very close and trusting with one another (in a normal, platonic way) makes most people happy, and want to be friends with those girls. And the Yuri stuff is like "extra close" in people's minds. They don't see these girls as actually romantically involved with each other (even as they post Yuri fanarts), and these companies are extremely careful to never show anything too sexual between them; great effort is made to make sure you can always dismiss these girls as just "very good friends", because that's what actually appeals to people, not the romantic tension.
Buddha lived around 500-400 BC, so he would've been roughly contemporary with the Greece of Athens' Golden age. Agreed that these ideas are certainly more ancient than Greece, but that was the lens which built Western Civilization (well, one half of that lens)
Vonnegut seems quotable here for the writers at Marvel and DC today…..”we are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful what we pretend to be.” Thanks again RJ for another great discussion.
4:02 That's because, conservatively speaking, two-thirds of philosophers are cut from the same cloth as Michel Foucault. Yes, even the "religious" ones.
Well, to be fair, she couldn't exactly be portrayed 100% accurately to her comic book appearance and origin because of ridiculous censorship in a 1990s children's animated television series. 😕
such a underrated channel, each video have such information about comics and such that I think: ´´There´s no way that this lad can top it``, just to find out that you toped it. Bloody diabolical, in a good sense
That's not even a "take", that's a given. They also write stories based on what Twitter tells them life is like, not ACTUAL life, because that requires having perspective and a wealth of life experience, which they cut themselves off from completely, because they fear everything and everyone that isn't them, because everything in life "triggers" them.
The conflict between worldviews that there is no fixed human nature vs human nature is fixed, implying economic and social laws that must be respected, is the basis of Thomas Sowell's "A Conflict of Visions" delving into why people who disagree on X view and disagree on Y seemingly unrelated view. It's a good read to understand the root difference in progressive vs conservative / libertarian ideology.
Watched a few of your videos in the last couple of days. You’ve gained a new subscriber. I love how well thought out your videos are, and how you break down some of the ideas that sometimes go over my head to where I can better understand them.
@@kohaiame2691 No, I mean Doc Ock! They're phasing out Otto and replacing him with a woman. Disney has kickstarted this phase-out with their show _Spidey and his Amazing Friends._
Those were some great covers you put up btw. (from a technical perspective) I especially liked the anthology titles that placed the story titles in creative ways. And the use of negative space.
Hats off To you!! Every word of argument you made?? It falls into it's right place!! "Logic" and "Truth"?? To these "progressives" words like that are plague to them... Coz to their belief they're above God...and Satan is a saviour!! But what they don't realise is, it's in our (Humans) imprint and nature, has been for thousands of years... the way we tell stories and see truth and logic. So it doesn't matter if they try for years on end to say otherwise?! The world will never revolve around them, and will always find a way to correct itself. And their story telling will always be disgusting!!👊
Well, in their eyes "God" would be an oppressor (if they actually believed in God), and the Devil misunderstood. And they would only accept "God" if "God" caved to their wishes, which shows you the massive level of narcissists you have to deal with. These are also the same people who would tell you that no "Higher Power has a monopoly on absolute morality", and completely proves the point that NO PERSON (not even those posing as moral crusaders) is in an actual position to be talking about morality and ethics AT ALL. They are pseudo-intellectuals who think they are somehow endowed by ultimate knowledge and awareness, while being COMPLETELY unaware and don't care about their own actions and its consequences on others AT ALL (because they believe that only "bad people" are hurt, and that's okay for them because as they and their "Enlightened Ones" get served, that is all that matters). Now that's one HELL of a slippery slope, and it's even more disturbing that you have both infantilized and deliberately ignorant people riding that slope.
@@sigmacademy Given the popularity of Islam in that crowd, I'm not sure they would like Satan. Islam doesn't like demons much. Then there are those "Reddit Atheists" who wouldn't believe in religious figures, & thus wouldn't like any of them as a result.
The welfare state has ensured the breeding potential of individuals that are a detriment to the species….. it could be argued the human race has already reached it’s optimal potential.
Well, the welfare state has always been a detriment to those it was set up to help. First, it makes you dependent on the government (who in itself, is only concerned with its own existence) and secondly, it deprives you of the opportunity to build personal wealth and further opportunities to become self-reliant and pursue opportunities to improve your economic status. It effectively sabotages everyone it tries to "help". As for its optimal potential, I would argue no, if anything, more barriers have been town up to block, slow down or flat out stop further optimal potential. The fact that everyone is now a ball ready for (or already optimized for) politicization. :/
Hey RJ. That psuedo Wolverine comic cover art is a re-skinned copy of the late great DMX's phenomenal second album "Flesh of my Flesh". I know because I owned that album!!
cuz the writer or author have a brain of 14 yrs old remember this quote from an woke author "IF YOU DON'T LIKE MY BOOK DON'T BUY MY BOOK" and later "PEOPLE LOSSING THEIR JOB NO ONE BUYING THE/MY BOOK"
Without respect to the nature of procreation, and conservation of traditional family values, that our great ancestors have passed to us, a certain group of human will extinct. Nature will take it's course. As always. It's a fact.
@@wordoftheday7650 What about pandemic, famines, natural disaster and even War? History has proven, nature and man's action will balance out everything. There can't be overpopulation. China restricted family policy ( to control population growth ) now backfires. India has the most dense population in the world face severe COVID-19 deaths. So do the rest of world. No one live in perfect Gaia world where people live long enough to overcrowding the world.
@@stormryder4305 The problem is that overcrowding WILL become an issue at some point in the not too distant future. We're already several BILLIONS on the planet, and each of those billions have to potential to increase the world's population by several times the current size, in very much as the current population was the same when compared against the Ancient world. That's largely due to increased sophistication of medicine and other improvements over the millennial has made sure that so many more people survive than previously (and that trend will simply increase in the future). If increasing suicide rates don't do the human race in first, I have to add. :/
@@sigmacademy overcrowding will become a global issue if each countries has the same constant fertility rate, such as Nigeria. 47.28 average annual births per 1,000 people per year. The problem is, although statistics show constant rising in global population, a lot of countries show declining in birth rate. Taiwan, for example, has an average 1.07 children per woman. United States currently has death rate exceeding birth rate. In other words, some countries are facing shrinking in population. We do not share border like we did in ancients time. Thus people can't migrate freely as they used to be to overcrowding the entire globe. Like I said in my previous post. Some human will go extinct in distant future. Like the neanderthal. Nature never fails to run it's course.
Well, yeah. The goal of ideological subversion is not to make you believe the lie, but to make the lie so pervasive and omnipresent that you feel alone in thinking the lie is wrong. "Grotesquery is beauty. Agree or be crushed
I mean people who put relish on hot dogs are in the minority, so they’re different. But I would still say it’s normal to put relish on a hot dog. There’s no contradiction there.
@@wordoftheday7650 No, normal means being within established parameters. Being "different" means being outside of those established parameters. I don't know the statistics on relish on hot dogs, but let's take mayonnaise instead. It is not normal to put mayonnaise on a hot dog. That's what different means.
The most painful thing about Marvel's Heroes is that so many of them were made in the 60s and they aint getting out of the Nuthouse of Social Justice any time soon...
Disgust is not just about survival. It's one of the very few things that can override survival. If you touched a very disgusting corpse you can go off into wilderness and most likely die, or go back to your clan probably carrying a disease. A primitive person in prehistory knowing nothing about germs would get that "I might have caught disgusting" and go off, only maybe going back after time passed and some cleansing ritual. Fear and anger can't substitute for it. If you want more empirical research on this (I'm at 6:30 so maybe its mentioned later in the vid?), Heidt is on point with this. His moral foundation research isolated conservatives, liberals, lefties and libertarians based on how much they respond to each foundation.
The idea that they are trying to desensitize us is eye opening. I had never realized it but it's true, my brother in law is a progressive and he would always try to get us to watch the most depressing and disgusting movie's. I would ask him why he wanted us to watch gross junk like that, and he would always just try to insult or shame me. Also I think it's interesting that desensitization is how they make new Reavers in FireFly.
I've heard the word is the phone around for a bit never knew what it meant and quite frankly last time someone called me that in the form I told them that they were just barking empty rhetoric that they picked up on some website without even understanding it
I don't necessarily agree with everything you say in your videos, but they are always well thought out and reasoned, and I think you do a particularly good job in showing the rational and logic behind your beliefs, as well as your explaining of your sources for your arguments. I always enjoy discourse that challenges my own views and philosophies, so long as it's not condescending or talking down to me, and this is definently one of your strong points! Not to mention that the parts where I do agree with you, I'm on board 100%. Keep up the good work, subscribed
I must confess, I've never been what most people would consider "normal," for good and ill. There were times growing up when I wished I was more normal, but thankfully I and others have grown to accept and appreciate my personal idiosyncrasies (within reason). If anything, I come from a family of proud weirdos. Admittedly, most of that family and associated upbringing were firmly anchored in Christian theology and philosophy, with a strong emphasis on scholarship. Despite how odd my family typically were/are, we were/are generally normal enough to function in society and adhere to basic universal codes of social propriety. Disgust is a relevant variable in this. Speaking my passions (including... let's say, "aesthetic tastes") often veer into bizarre territories that I'm fairly certain would garner strange looks from the vast majority of people. Which is fine by me. Many of my passions are niche, and I am not inclined to force those things on anyone, particularly if I know that doing so would disgust the parties involved. If anything, much of the media I consume delves into dark territories, with scenarios that should either stay fictional or are thankfully impossible in the real world. The idea of redefining "normal" or "beautiful" to fit my interests or worldview is alien to me (not least of which because, as established, I am fairly unique). But then, none of this is a surprise. All of the ideas underlying these "progressives'" ideology is rooted in Marx. And to use ancient mythic/cosmic terminology, Marxism in all its forms is a recipe for dissolving the ordered world (bound, constrained by form, functional, stable) back into the cosmic chaos (raw potential, unbound, formless, without function, unstable) from which it arose. To quote John H. Walton's _Ancient Near Eastern Thought and the Old Testament,_ in material terms, chaos would be a substance where you would be unable to differentiate earth, sea, and sky, as it would contain the undifferentiated substance of all three. _This concept scared the Hell out of people in the ancient Near East,_ who thought the world was a great sky-domed earthen disc surrounded on all sides by a the aforementioned cosmic ocean of chaos (which itself abutted the known world through the oceans, springs, and precipitation). They viewed the gods as being charged with maintaining the functioning of this enclosed island of order in the cosmic ocean, a struggle they would one day lose. (Judeo-Christian tradition is an outlier in this regard, as they established Yahweh's power as absolute, and the creation accounts of Genesis show Yahweh _integrating chaos itself_ as an integral part of His grand design for the universe, a potentially nourishing or destructive force that's still utterly subservient to Him at the end of the day.) Chaos was expressed by that which opposed what was viewed as a sane, properly functioning cosmos: wild beasts vs livestock, city vs wilderness, salt water vs fresh water, the predictable motions of the stars vs the (then) unpredictable motions of comets and meteors, reliable seasonable harvest vs famine and drought, health vs sickness, countrymen vs foreigners, national sovereignty vs conquest by an enemy power, peace vs war, judges and kings upholding justice vs naked corruption, etc., etc. Chaos had its uses in measured doses, but was rightly feared for the havoc it could wreak on individual and social scales. Moreover, *phenomena which the ancients associated with chaos instinctively inspire revulsion and disgust responses.* Thus, great expense was taken in maintaining order in the ancient world. This pattern repeats itself in other regions of the world as well, especially in cultures where rulers cast themselves as partially or wholly divine; conceptually, they claimed, like the gods they worshipped and served as intermediaries for, were tasked with maintaining the order of the universe and keeping the forces of chaos at bay. Socialism and its many derivatives find fault with reality itself, and so declare war on the structures and boundaries that _define_ reality, that allow it to find function and purpose. To put this in Egyptian terms, they represent Apep/Apophis, the serpent of chaos who threatens Ra's solar barque as it travels through the underworld every night. While there are multiple surviving Egyptian cosmologies, most of them conceived of original creation as gods emerging from the chaotic ocean of Nun, with the first God, Ra-Atum, creating the world through the creation of a cascading multiplicity of gods (and aspects thereof) charged with carrying out increasingly complex cosmic processes and functions. The entire cosmology hinged on a diversity of gods, ones whose identities often overlapped or merged as the need arose. Apep represented the complete anathema of this principle, the chaos at war with every aspect of the ordered universe. Every night, it was believed that Ra would die, be carried through the underworld to be rejuvenated, and be reborn with the dawn. During this night journey, Apep would lay siege against Ra's barque, and would hypnotize the other gods to sleep so that he might devour Ra. Only Seth was immune to this lure. This is because Seth was himself a god of chaos (domains included the desert, storms, foreigners, etc.) who had previously murdered Osiris and usurped his throne. Following his war of succession with Osiris' son, Horus, however, Seth was punished but ultimately reformed, taking on the role of chaos tamed for positive/protective ends. Able to see through Apep's glamour, he would spear the serpent in the head, breaking the spell and enabling the other gods to resume fighting. Apep would inevitably retreat to try again the next night. But this was ultimately a war of attrition, and the gods were doomed to eventually lose. The Egyptian conception of the end of the world was couched in terms of this endless conflict, and its implications for a cosmos built on a diversity of gods. Eventually, Seth would fail, Apep would devour Ra, followed by the other gods, before swimming off into the waters of Nun from whence he came. *Conceptually, this meant reducing the many gods into one, and by doing so erasing the structures and functions that define and maintain the universe back into the formless singularity of raw potential that predated existence.* Marx and his would-be successors seek to do the same, presuming in their hubris that once they destroy the world as we know it, they will have the means, knowledge, and moral fiber necessary to create not only a better world, _but a perfect one._ Myths from around the globe are replete with gods smiting mortals for their hubris, but Marx's hubris bordered on that of a devil figure or chaotic god hellbent on destroying existence and committing evil for its own sake. Anyone suckered into this cult is certifiably insane and a menace to society.
When I think about woke ideas aren't entirely bad ideas, but the people who push them don't fully understand them. They come off like pompous ass hats that are are stuck on a high horse. I say this because they're are actually shows, movies, comic books and more that show off these same ideas but in a better way. I think the difference is just how it is perceived by the audience and how much emphasis is placed on it along with how divisive it is. You can look at it like this which would you find more interesting? A History teacher who lectures you about history and its importance, but doesn't acknowledge new information regarding history or other sources besides what he know or believes. Or a Science teacher with a out there or wild world view and is very opinionated but doesn't talk about it unless asked to and is open to new information regarding not only his world view but I others as well.
traditionalism is a thing some things sould be kept sacred. Or else we might start dumping people in ovens if we go to far the last geration is supost to pass on virtue that was passed down to them. the past can be boring but its still needed. its true thoes who do not know the past are doomed to repeat it.
"A History teacher who lectures you about history and its importance, but doesn't acknowledge new information regarding history or other sources besides what he know or believes". Well, that makes that person no different than those that believed in (fake) mediums, snake oil salesmen or any number of scams or hoaxes throughout history? (not to mention, the myths that each approved (by the government of the day) history curriculum perpetuate depending on what is considered "okay to learn/know" by each school administration)? Also, wouldn't a "very opinionated person" talk about their wild world view regardless of being asked or not, as well as being a relatively close-minded individual, because being an opinionated person means talking more than actually listening to others? Also, if you say "woke ideas aren't necessarily bad", what you are actually saying is that you're okay with being manipulated and lied to, because that's what woke ideas actually are - the hijacking of better/different ideas that are then politicized for use in gaining political power by claiming those better/different ideas as a monopoly only they are capable and entitled to use and control.
@@sigmacademy Woke ideas aren't immediately bad only because there is SOME truth to them. Representation does matter but nowhere to the extreme that woke people take it, not mistreating people based on skin color is also not bad, but giving races certain liberties or immunities is crazy. It's not the ideas that are bad it's the way they are executed and enforced. Same thing with feminism it's not bad for women to be equal to men and focus on empowering women, but most of the movement today is just hating men.
"Nietzsche knew it wasn't rational, he didn't care" Well when you're criticising something you don't tend to care that it isn't rational. I find it odd how widespread the leftist and Christian praise and criticism of his work respectively stem from thinking his criticism of the progressives of his time was his position.
At the Fear part....yes, I know exactly the studies and the later ways similar were conducted....Thom Hartmann LOVES citing this, or used to....it is in Proverbs that Fear of the Lord brings Wisdom....hence the admonition to the "conservative" to be wary, wariness will ensure that you gain the insight of cultural (and Cosmic, in religious thought) memory, hence "Prudentia/Wisdom". All things that were must go, to the Progressives.
That's because some Progressives have clearly stated that since 'everything' was tainted previously, everything must go. Still doesn't explain why they then infected "previous" or try to remold it in their own image, almost as if they are either hypocrites, or liars, or both.
I've just got a refund for a game. I bought it on the Steam sales and at first glance it appeared nice. I've only started to play earlier today and the protagonist felt a bit weird. Thirty minutes into the game, I've realized (almost?) every single character was a gay android. Heck no.
@@wordoftheday7650 The androids wouldn't be sexual in ANY kind of way, because there would be no rational reason for them to engage in the act, because they can't reproduce like humans can, they gain no "pleasure" from the act, and any attempt to do so would be an act of exploitation. They could only be INSTRUCTED to do so, which opens a brand new can of worms. It seems you might have some kind of bias. The fact that you don't even ATTEMPT to seek clarification on what the commentator said and just slapped back for no reason except to counter with "would you say the same if they were all straight" ACTUALLY uncovers more about YOUR bias than it does the other commentator's.
As a centrist, myself, I see virtues and vices on both sides. Neither side is "better" per se than the other and both sides are perfectly "normal" in any given society. From my perspective we, as a species, need both those who strongly feel disgust and those who are less susceptible to it, both conservatives and liberals. It is definitely true that some people present disgusting material in a way that's not appropriate, almost reveling in being disgusting. It's also true however that some people's sense of disgust is hyperactive. For example, there were people out there who felt legitimately disgusted when they saw mixed race or same sex couples, and there are still some who feel that way. People should be able to overcome their disgust at merely living alongside people making such different choices for themselves, but it's not always quite so easy to do. There is a push-pull between leftists and conservatives. Leftists would pull us off a cliff if conservatives didn't anchor us, but conservatives would leave us stuck and unable to adapt cultural norms in a way that I don't think would be beneficial in the long run. The big difference is people used to be able to disagree and still have friends on the other side, now not as much. There is a tendency to see those on the other side as "evil" in some way, shape or form.
"There is no such thing as normal" Statisticians will disagree. There's also various things you can look at between "median" and "average" alone. When they bring up the nonsensical that being gay or trans is normal, I retort: No, it's not normal, but it's natural. A natural occurrence for whatever reason, but nothing normal.
That stance also shuts down their "but muh homosexual animals!!1!" argument too. Just because something can occur naturally doesn't make it normal. By their logic, tumors are also normal because they can occur naturally.
Ah yes the disgust response that is linked to the moral foundation of sanctity/purity and is way more pronounced in women then in men. Fun fact: the stronger your disgust response, the less open you are to new experiences (thus making conservatives more closed minded than more liberal folks). There are benefits to it and handicaps.... hence why a society must have a balance of change averse folks like yourself and those who push for changes to the system to ideally make it preform better.
I have to respectfully disagree with you. Not all fears are justified, and I say it as extremly anxiouse person-I control my fears through rational thinking. I also want to reffer to the cost of giving in to disgust and fear when it isnt warranted- I have a dear friend. Disabled, cross eyed crooked hands and speach diffucilities. At first I have felt disgust when I first seen him. I was asked to be his roomie and to take care of him, and through it I have discovered a very intelgent, hard working, ambitiouse man who also run works of charity for children with cancer. to help him go to the bathroom was never fun. Was it worth it? Yes. I think compasssion and kindness are also important. I am not seeing disgust and fear are alwys wrong-I am just saying,like any feeling,they should be processed through rationality
I think you need to give Joey Q more blame then Sama. He hired her in the first place. As you have said. And she didn't do anything he didn't want her to do.
as a gay non-binary person I agree with so much that you talk about and i love that you are insightful. you truly care and take time to explain scientifically what drives your opinions and arguments. its so refreshing to hear your take on things because SOOO many people want to just be stuck in a box and they dont want to even TRY to be open minded to ANYTHING.
Lower disgust sensitivity allows an individual to engage with novelty more easily. Novelty is needed so that a society doesn't stagnate and die. It's not accurate to say that people with a lower disgust sensitivity are not normal. I need to listen to this again, but I'm not sure I follow your connection between lower disgust sensitivity and utopian thinking.
It's not Utopian thinking that makes a Progressive. Christians have a utopia they work toward. The difference is that Progressives believe that THEY will create the utopia, by forcing everyone into it. Everyone will become like them, or be destroyed. Christians believe God will create his Kingdom by saving his followers from themselves and their sin. Satan, who controls Progressive thinking, having created it originally, revels in sin and evil and rebellion, and deviation. Our own God-created natures revolt at deviation in disgust. But the more we come under Satan's influence, the less disturbed we become. We see this illustrated by children who torture insects go on to small animals and grow up to be serial killers who torture other people. We see this in the Nazi atrocities where at first the SS troops were horrified and disturbed by what they did, but the longer it went on, eventually they became hardened and would make jokes about it. It's known as searing ones conscience. It's how Progressives have gone from "just let the poor homos out of their closet" to "legalize love" (gay marriage) to having homosexual characters in every form of entertainment to "you better make them that cake and celebrate Gay pride or else" to "hey, pedophiles deserve love too." It's how they went from "legalize abortion so women don't did in back alleys from coat hangers" to celebrate your abortion (the murder of your child) and California proposing a law to prevent women who murder their children even 7 days after birth from being charged for murder. It's the same way we start out with small sins and work our way up. Eve's first sin wasn't eating the forbidden fruit, it was believing the serpent when he said, "Did God say...?" Every step you take down that road just makes it harder to stop and easier to keep going. It's straight out of Satan's playbook from the origin of sin itself in the garden.
@@dontbothertoreply9755 Boldness and caution... why are they both ingrained in us? Because both serve the cause of survival, not bold enough and you don't eat or breed, not cautious enough and you get eaten by something else. One nature program on owls showed two baby owls in a tree hollow. The slightly older nestling always stood near the front near the hole in the tree, and was getting the lion's share of the food. It grew big and strong. The second nestling got almost no food and almost never got near the hole in the tree and was near death. Then suddenly a hawk landed on the tree, reached in with a giant claw, seized the big fat nestling, and flew off with it. Leaving the barely living nestling to survive to adulthood. So which was the better strategy?
@@anonygent Well, considering the fact that the second nestling barely survived childhood, I would assume that it would suffer issues from that experience. So it's not only an issue of "survival", but actually of how food was wasted on a nestling that not only got eaten, but ultimately didn't even survive to adulthood, and therefore was unable to contribute to the ecosystem that nature is?
I recommend you watch Jordan Petersons video on Germanys Disgust sensitivity in World War 2. Disgust sensitivity can do just as much harm as it does good. If you're *too* disgust sensitive. You'll do horrible things to others in the name of getting rid of that disgust. There's a difference between being cautious of or criticizing a lifestyle and doing terrible things to other people because of your disgust. "Why h*tler bathed more often than you think" is the name of the video. I do think extremist leftist ways of thinking are disgusting. But by that same token it's also our responsibility to make sure the pushback against it is humane and rational and reasonable, and doesn't go down a dark and extreme path as the leftist themselves. On one hand, you don't want schools pushing and normalizing hormone blockers for 14 year olds. On the other hand, you don't want Anti-Gay gaslighting at your local church camp. Because that's letting ones disgust control you and lead you down a dark path.
"But by that same token it's also our responsibility to make sure the pushback against it is humane and rational and reasonable, and doesn't go down a dark and extreme path as the leftist themselves." It's ironic you should say that, because some leftists have NO PROBLEM using any and all TACTICS at their disposal, including employing and celebrating selective racism and sexism whenever it suits them. It's why their infiltration was so rapid and devastating because they presented themselves as only promoting rational and reasonable humane action, which was a total lie meant to manipulate and give them easy access to gullible people, from which they could then launch their "victory". You also have to take into account that there are MULTIPLE HARD-CORE CULTISTS who will NEVER leave the cause or stop attacking others - their whole identity and sense of self has been built around that ideology and feeds them purpose to give meaning to their existence, and to abandon it or acknowledge the evils done in its name would destroy them on a mental level and they would do ANYTHING to avoid facing the reality of what they have done. :/ The problem is that we've BEEN pushing back in a humane, rational and reasonable way FOR YEARS NOW, and the only thing it's gotten us is seeing more sane people being fed into the leftist meat grinder (and that behavior even being monetized and encouraged) - to be harassed, victimized, threatened and destroyed by people who claim to be doing it for a "greater good" - their bad behavior gets excused and even ignored on a continuous basis, while at the same time those very same people have the gall to be talking about "accountability culture", while being policed by the biggest hypocrites and fake crusaders who can't even live by the VERY principles they claim to follow. :/
It's important to note that the disgust reaction is absent in "liberal" brains when seeing pictures or movies. In real life, the disgust reaction happens for both groups. If a liberal or a conservative saw something disgusting or upsetting in real life, they would both react with distress and disgust. Some people might conclude that this means that liberals are not disgusted by disgusting things. It could also be concluded that conservatives are easily emotionally manipulated by imagery, feeling as though this disgusting image was equally appalling as if it were real. It depends on how you want to interpret the data.
They actually did go over that a bit. They found that conservatives avoid manipulation in this way by letting their gaze settle for longer on an image, to ensure the thing is, or is not, a threat. Thus, there is more engagement of the rational mind to counter the emotional.
Small Addendum (which will only make sense if you watch to the end.): Never be ashamed of being afraid. Courage is acting despite being afraid, and courage follows from prudence and justice.
You can't be courageous if you don't fear anything.
I've never truly understood the way ists and phobes are thrown around so loosely, which is one reason why I've lost interest in most things. I'm not necessarily afraid, more like knowledgeable that their ideas do not correlate within reality and I'm getting tired of it.
@@Skyler-Thorson "-ist" and "-phobe" is foul form of sciencism where someone is trying to bamboozle you with a "science-sounding" medical diagnosis for disagreeing with their opinion.
Or to put it more simply: "you must be mentally-ill if you disagree with me" which is rich considering the people who like to slander with "-ist" and "-phobe" actively _celebrate_ mental illness.
@@Theranthrope thanks for clearing that up, I've been trying to wrap my head around it, again thanks
@@Skyler-Thorson Progressives have always gaslighted, especially when it comes to masculinity and sexuality. They used to do it when they hated sports. If you watched football they would accuse the sport of being homoerotic and the fans of being closet homosexuals. Why? Because sports used to represent traditional America and the domain of manly men. Now that sports have been hijacked by progressive politics they don't do that much anymore.
This explains exactly why modern movies have no happy ending; why their plots are pointless, and resistance is futile. That's the lesson they teach: resistance is futile. Just obey.
Not to sound like I'm arguing, but I'll have to take your word on it as the last movie I watched in theaters was the first Avengers and I don't feel like I've missed out on anything
Simply put, we have to be like RJ and make our own damm entertainment.
@@Theranthrope It's truly a shame. With movies etc. from the 80's and even 90's to some degree I had no idea what an artist/directors politics were just based on their work most of the time.
Remember the Borgs in Star Trek! "Prepare for assimilation! Resistance is futile!" The Borgs are a collective with drones and some queens. The drones are NPC and are only there to obey. What's been done to them is horrific but considered normal. I don't know who created them but they're a good analogy to the progressives. Between their appearance and now they went from an absolute threat to something normal. I saw them, I think, before Trump and now they are Biden.
Great...they are the Borg.
Yeah a Hive Mind that have the exact same talking points.
Essentially stories inspired hope while propaganda invites despair. As long as you have a source of hope you can live on, which is why the powers that be is trying to crush any medium of hope to instill their despair.
liberalism is a mental illness confirmed
I mean, they are filled with narcissism, hypocrism, villainy, stupidity and reeks of writers who think they are better than you when they clearly aren't.
If they had kept the half-naked and skin tight suit women, one could at least have kept looking at them for the pictures while ignoring all the story and text.
What's worse is that the villainy is thinly masked as heroism in spite of how morally repugnant it is.
I'd had Nihilism to that list...Almost every time. They love to blur the lines of "Good" and Evil" then somehow try to paint the "evil" characters as just being misunderstood.
That is why I am able to enjoy Ultimatum. Yeah the story is awful, but David Finch's art is beautiful so at least it is a shit show that is pleasant to look at lol.
@@bryan81584
To be fair, some of that seems to be born from the almost entirely feminine attraction to "the bad boy," and the concomitant desire to help/reform/tame him. Given that most fanfic writers are adolescent girls, this explains their adoration of antagonists and rivals to the protagonist, which also tends to correspond with self-indulgent shipping or self-inserts somehow. I suspect much of the corruption we see in media is due to hiring (intentionally or not) female writers who never matured past this self-indulgent adolescent mindset. While not necessarily deliberate iconoclasm (if anything, it seems more likely _that_ can be blamed on those who intentionally hire such immature writers), it would explain why so many projects devolve into scenarios devoid of struggle, chock full of sociopolitical text walls, and little more than the instant gratification of what women generally want (especially adoration and personal validation).
Well, this explains why I can't enjoy most of the so-called "entertainment" so-to-speak that these alleged, supposed "entertainers" are making, and selling in the "entertainment" industry. Every character that they expect the buyers of this "entertainment" to root for as the "hero protagonist" is, in actuality, an asshole. I can't find myself rooting for an asshole. That's not not someone to be revered. At least, not to me. But hey, people, despite everything that is plaguing us, do not despair. The Rippaverse has now begun. Prepare yourselves.
What is the Rippaverse?
@@constantinwilliams9388 The Rippaverse is the independent comic book company founded by UA-camr Eric D. July, a.k.a. YoungRippa59. Check out his most recent videos on his UA-cam channel YoungRippa59 and he explains everything in detail about his own independent comic book universe with his own independent comic book super-hero characters where he intends to be and do way better than the soy woke S.J.W. "mainstream" comic book companies like DC Comics and Marvel Comics. He does not cater to the Politically Correct N.P.C. bullshit agenda that Hollywood is constantly pushing on Twitter.
@@constantinwilliams9388 look up Eric July and the Rippaverse
@@constantinwilliams9388 Eric July's channel is Youngrippa59. Rippaverse is his comic thing he's going to do.
The so called "hero protagonists" Hollywood liked to call them are what tv tropes call "Designated heroes", characters we're told they're the good guys and presented as such even though their actions says otherwise. That or the sociopathic heroes where they're messed up but the narrative doesn't pretend they're not
Ahhh... do you know what it's called when someone tries to make you numb to horror and disgust by subjecting you to it again and again? Brainwashing. They did it to Geordi in Star Trek: The Next Generation.
He and that damned visor were quite the security risk.
Remember that episode with Picard being interrogated with a zapper and lights? Picard always said there are 4 lights, but the interrogator wanted him to 5.
@@clintmatthews3500 Good point. One wonders why it wasn't hardened against external radio access. Of course Data was an even bigger security risk than the visor.
@@jaspermcminnis5538 What makes that even deeper is that he admits later that he WANTED to say there were 5, just to make the torture stop. But he refused to, both because that meant he would be giving in and because it wasn't true.
@@palladiamorsdeus This was in contrast with how he submitted to the Borg, simply because he lost his last family member and so desperately wanted to "belong" to a family again (despite Starfleet functioning like an extended family, which clearly contrasted that choice of dialogue).
The reason that "progressive" personalities are not repelled by disgusting things is that they are high in trait openness. They constantly seek out new experiences and knowledge. This desire is useful when grounded to an ethos. However, the progressive of today pushes this impulse to the degree of vice. It's the foundation of the liberation mindset and the desires to seek out and promote the "forbidden."
It's because they are psychopaths
@@Kommander_Rahnn yep
This is interesting. Personally I figure I've always had had a fair bit of trait openness. I'd hardly be considered a conservative, and have always appreciated things that are a bit "alternative". But I've always had a strong sense of disgust.
Been repelled by "progressivism" since day one. I can't stand to even look at most movies and tv, even momentarily. Just flipping through netflix alone gives me a strange feeling of disgust.
@@mistersharpe4375 I'm also high in trait "openness," but I'm also high in conscientiousness and disagreeableness. It's a weird combo. I crave knowledge but I'm unwilling to compromise my beliefs.
@@Vesuya Oh that's a good point. I can't professionally assess myself, but I feel that I am undeniably high in disagreeableness. Otherwise, I'd have an easier time fitting in. I've often been accused of disliking everything that is popular in the mainstream, which I don't think I'm doing on purpose.
Politically and religiously, I'm a strong proponent of freedom (and non-aggression). I'm no conservative, but being inundated with constant Leftist rhetoric has given the term "Liberal" a sour taste in my mouth.
Forced Friendships, Overkill Emotions, Preachy. Hard to find it fun.
Language is such a vital part of this subject. SJW‘s are always inventing new words, and redefining old ones. For example… The term cis. That word was invented because they could not abide the existence of the word “normal”.
That’s just categorization word. That’s like saying the term dry clean only is bad because they could handle normal drying lmao.
Technically, the way they use it, it's more meant as a derogatory term in such a way that many normal people would think it's just supposed to indicate a difference in categorization, especially with the current expansion of biological sex and identity.
The erasure of boundaries, sabotage of function, denial of meaning and purpose. All these games do is spread pure linguistic chaos. And like the forces of chaos in ancient myth cycles, *they seek to destroy everything that exists.*
Likewise referring to people with normal sexual appetites as "straight" or "heterosexual" to imply it's equal somehow to being bent or homosexual or otherwise aberrant.
That was very lucid and timely.
This tightens up the loose edges of my recent, (as of this year), deep seated decision to respond to certain "ista-phobe" accusations with, "Actually, yes, I'm scared. I have every reason to be. Here's why... (followed by a, "Why wouldn't you want me to fear ____? Are you trying to bring me to harm?" while eyeing them with theatrical suspicion.)
I might have to use that next time someone accuses me of being a transaphobe or something.
Islamaphone makes me laugh the most. I grew up in an era when they showed car bombings on a weekly basis done by extremist islamic forces so yeah, I'd say a bit of fear on that end is fairly well justified. Logically speaking I know its not all of them...but you have no way of knowing WHICH of them might ascribe to that level of cult behavior. It also doesn't help when you hear about the acid attacks that are becoming a constant problem in the UK either...
@@palladiamorsdeus Unfortunately for every one horrid act they do, the rest of us Muslims must perform 4 good actions to make up for the bad action of the one.
@@Darksky1001able
I would settle for repudiating the moral example set by your leaders and your psychopath of a prophet. Even calling out mob violence, honor killings, FGM, persecution of dhimmis, maltreatment of women, encouragement of child marriage, encouragement of slavery, dehumanization of non-believers, destruction of monuments and antiquities, etc. would be a welcome change of pace. But no one in your community *_ever_* calls your fellow believers out. Instead, all I ever hear is silence or *gloating.* Even now, your preoccupation is not with the atrocities carried out in the name if your religion, but merely how those things make your religion look bad.
Case in point, the recent attempt on the life of Salman Rushdie for writing a book that makes reference to the Satanic Verses. Despite the fact that the original Satanic Verses were not considered controversial for several centuries after they were recorded, they were only later marked as apocryphal when imams suddenly realized that *they brought the entire legitimacy of Muhammad's supposed prophethood into question,* as Mo supposedly mistook a revelation from Satan as coming from Allah/Jibril. *Not being able to tell the difference between the angel delivering messages from your god and the Devil is a very big deal; based on such a gross error, who's to say any of Mo's revelations actually came from Allah?* And all Rushdie did was _remind the Islamic world that those passages exist_ in a satirical book he wrote. Rather than grapple with the existential threat to their worldview (and thus force imams to give up their power), Islamists issued a fatwa against Rushdie. Rushdie came out of hiding after more than 30 years to give a symposium on the importance of free speech, only to get stabbed and lose an eye for his trouble. And how has your community responded? *_Celebrating in the streets with the same fervor they did on 9/11!_* The gloating and saying "he got what he deserved, Allah be praised" were near universal on social media. The only objections raised were those saying Rushdie *should have been executed by legal means in accordance with Sharia law,* ie their only (alleged) problem was the vigilantism; he still deserved to die for the blasphemy of insulting your so-called prophet, a prophet which your religion forces you to venerate even more than your supposed god (who's committing shirk, now?). I have not encountered a single one of your co-religionists unconditionally condemning the attack on Rushdie, and I have read enough of your "holy" books to know that Muhammad would have not only commanded the slaying, but would have condemned as cowards any [M-words] who didn't step up to take Rushdie's head _in his name._
For that matter, define "4 good actions" done in the name of Islam that somehow absolve any of the atrocities carried out in the name of Islam since its inception. Because I know enough about Islamic charities to know they either serve as fronts for [T-word] groups, serve to enrich the Saudi royal family, or only ever serve the interests of [M-words] while overtly avoiding helping non-believers.
@@palladiamorsdeus
"Islamophobia" itself was a phrase coined by the Muslim Brotherhood to capitalize on the growing culture of political correctness in the West during the 80s and 90s. Its entire purpose is to stifle public discussion of Islam by insinuating that any criticism of Islam is rooted in bigotry. Given that the last few generations in Western countries have been largely ignorant of Islam and its tenets, most people bought the narrative, and Western leaders rolled with it (in spite of numerous [T-word] attacks) in order to maintain good relationships with Saudi Arabia and other Middle Eastern oil producing countries, all of which were predominantly Islamic and employed Sharia to varying degrees. Those who did try to raise serious concerns have been consistently ignored and deplatformed, while our political and media class have either stood by or piled on in order to avoid figuratively rocking the boat.
"Islamophobia" redefines "poisoning the well."
The fact that woke movies are bad is enough, but it's the whole process behind it that disgusts me. You can make your fanfic about a gay nonbinary trans black Batman, but when the intent is to erase or undermine the original, that's when I start getting disgusted.
Or what about portraying most men as weak, villain or a loser?
@@Thomasmemoryscentral that too
I believe they want to convince everyone there is no such thing as normal, because that would mean there would be no such thing as strange. Those two things would still exist, people just wouldn't be equipped with the vocabulary to describe them.
It actually goes deeper than that. They want to convince only THEIR interpretation of normal applies and should be accepted. Which clearly creates a conflict between their "we are all for choice", as long as you choose THEIR option as your only decision. :/
theres no such thing as universal normality. Why does no one in this comment section know the words "relative" or "subjective"?!
That is literally the whole point of newspeak in 1984.
@@Xbalanque84 I know. It's double unplus good.
@@cheerfulsatanist Men being attracted to women and vice-versa is a universal normality. Humans believing metaphysical beings exist is a universal normality. Believing that repeating an action which caused an effect will have a repetition of the effect is a universal normality.
Some things are subjective; both of our eyes may objectively see the same primary blue, but my subjective emotions may decide this blue is extremely appealing while yours might say the saturation is too high and be uncomfortable, or that it is too cold and you'd prefer a red or orange. That is how real subjectivism works; calling the blue orange just because you wish it to be so is not, nor is denying the existence of color just because you are colorblind.
Relativity also exists. In an objective stance you, myself, and a rock may all be arranged in a row with the rock between us. To me, the rock is to the immediate East, then you the far East. To you, the rock is the immediate West and I am the far West. That is how real relativism works.
Congrats on getting close to 20k subscribers! As for the topic, fear and disgust are natural reactions to frightening and horrific things. It's part of how we not only grow, but how we know that something is wrong.
Hey Brian
@@Wolf10media hey bro! Good to see you!
This is an extremely underrated comic book channel
Comic book channel in the surface, philosophy channel in actuality.
he is the one who explains deeply about entertainment in the west, especially comics, it is very rare for a channel like this to exist, others only make fun of progressive people but don't explain deeply with philosophy, because it is interesting but not popular, contains something deep, profound and interesting topics
Congrats on your way to 20K, RJ! I've enjoyed your insight for a few years now.
Oh Hey there Sound!!!
@@Wolf10media Hey there, Wolf10!
I’m not necessarily disgusted by progressive stories but the attitude of the creators. That smug “I’m progressive, therefore I’m better than you” attitude is disgusting. I’m cool with new stories, progressive or not, just don’t be an asshole to your readers.
The problem with "progressive stories" are that they are DEEPLY dishonest, and are actually DELIBERATE based on stereotypes, with overblown, convoluted setups that are meant to strike at political rivals in not too subtle ways, not actually tell a story based on any kind of universal issue or value, which reveals it as the shallow propaganda it actually is. It's one thing if a storyteller wants to tell a story about compassion; it's another thing when said person is blasting "his/her preferred group of people to hate" on Twitter, while simultaneously lecturing you about morality and mercy. :/
Also, it doesn't help that people PAY them to keep up the fake mask of "caring", when the money is all they care about, and they make that CRYSTAL CLEAR. :/
I would agree - but these stories; what they view Good as, the boundaries that their “good” characters will and won’t cross, the values of their characters, etcetera, reflect their own morality. If someone makes Superman, the original paragon of virtue, a murderer, without any sort of ramifications or moral issues, then that implies that the author believes that murder is okay.
Of course, most people know that Superman would never kill, and even in the rare stories that he does it’s universally painted as negative (“whatever happened to the man of tomorrow,” “Injustice,” etc.). Were someone to think that Superman would kill in all but the most severe circumstances, it would imply either a severe misunderstanding of the character or a deranged author.
@@obviouslykaleb7998 so by your logic, everything an author writes automatically means they also believe in??? I guess most horror directors are secretly serial killers or their groupies then.
@@cheerfulsatanist name certainly checks out.
How did you miss literally 90% of the comment?
Edit: not even 90%. Literally every single sentence. How?
Their stories may be intended to make their world view part of me, but, they inevitably fail because they suck at writing so badly. A good example of this was the latest (and hopefully the last) Charlie's Angels reboot. It tanked like an M1 Abrams falling into the ocean. Or Ghostbusters 2016. Or all the future MCU movies.
My point being that they can intend to convert people all they want, but, someone has to actually be willing PAY to watch/read their poorly crafted stories to even hear their propaganda. They are failing. Across the board. Look at the movies. Look at the comics. Nobody wants what they're selling. The tide is slowly turning.
At the same time, their replacements are in the wings revving their motors getting ready to roll out. You're working on your line. Eric July just released the Rippaverse. So my response is, let the mainstream continue to embrace this poison that is killing them. They've been creatively bankrupt for years. Even before the SJWs invaded.
Its time for a new industry to rise. Viva la revolution.
Agree with every point you make. Just have to point out one small mistake:
While St. Agustine wrote that critique of Stoicism, he was a Manichaen in his youth, not a Stoic.
Though as a Roman he would have been very familiar with Stoicism.
Thanks for the Heart!
Manichean*
@@mistery8363 Thanks. I would edit the comment, but the heart will go away.
That isn’t Wolverine.
She was just fine as X-23 though.
Like YoungRippa says, they(leftiods) only find legitimacy in white male characters. Ms. Marvel becomes Captain Marvel, X 23 becomes Wolverine, Jane becomes Thor.
Have not read the comics, but X-23 could be considered something akin to a “slave name”. Something that is assigned to her and thus disagreeable.
Like how Logan/ Wolverine would not like to be called Weapon X. Again have not read the comics so would not know how true this is. But I doubt any progressive writers to use common sense, since the NORMAL conclusion to this this logic train is get a normal human name like Chloe or Jennifer.
I'm reminded of a passage from "The Neverending Story:"
"When it comes to controlling human beings there is no better instrument than lies. Because, you see, humans live by beliefs. And beliefs can be manipulated. The power to manipulate beliefs is the only thing that counts.”
Science is constantly discovering what philosophers already hashed out. Nargarjuna discussed the unification of time and space as a fact in 500bc.
Things are either so cynical nowadays and trying so hard to be edgy, or a complete woke joke.
The funny thing is, its crap cynicism. Like none of the characters are capable or believable to use power in a interesting cynical way. Tbh their characters feel like someone's dating profile rather than the actual person
@@assortmentofpillsbutneverb3756 yeah, it all feels very Hollywoodized
@@assortmentofpillsbutneverb3756 lmao, like the cynical comic I’m making.
I love being edgy and provocative, but more than that I love truth and justice. It tickles me to no end that presently, the best way to be edgy and counter-cultural is to simply have a story about a brave hero who aggressively and violently puts an end to the wicked with maybe a little blood or guts for verisimilitude.
The whole fight or flight thig when looking at images is interesting and puts a certain part of my childhood in perspective. When I was 7 I had no trouble playing the first Mortal Kombat game. I actually played it a lot and found it very fun. My parents even let me watch the movie and with the exception of Scorpions death and Shang Sung turning into a skeleton after his death I could easily look at the movie. However when I rented Mortal Kombat II I felt very uncomfortable playing that game. It's aesthetic, violence, and colors made it difficult for me to want to keep playing. After just a few fatalities and brutalities I stopped playing and never rented the game again. Kids at school would talk about Mortal Kombat II, 3, and Ultimate 3, but the most I did was look at the players guides. My friends dad also had Doom and I was able to play that with no problems either. It was just something about the way Mortal Kombat II and the later 3, and Ultimate 3 presented themselves that I could not handle.
However when I was getting close to 10 a new friend I met at school had the games and talked about them often. When he came over to my house one day he brought his Mortal Kombat II and I was able to handle the game by that time.
I rarely do feel disgusted so intensively 😕. But Netflix Cuties makes me vomit 🤢 🤮.
You know what, I would have loved for X-23 to take on a hero name to honor her father Wolverine. She could have called herself "Honey Badger," and there's a lot of nice little jokes and puns you could make from that name alone, as well as some satisfying payoffs.
Honey Badger was already taken as a hero name by X-23's younger clone. I think she should have just kept the X-23 name.
Some other Mustelidae with maybe cool names: Polecat, Pine Marten, Grison, Tayra, Stoat, Blackfoot(ed Ferret), Mink, Ermine.
I think Polecat's my favorite, in a cheeky kinda way, given how the character's been treated at times.
First it would need to acknowledge that a dad did something worthy of being honored, and THAT position is not a favorable position to hold in current-day Hollywood, not to mention some "movements" would write ENDLESS articles on how women are negatively affected by a guy being acknowledged in any way whatsoever. :/
All sorts of weasels she could've named herself after, but that's possibly the best I've ever seen suggested.
There are some subjective forms of disgust, and others which ate entirely objective.
Disgust for rot, decay, and disease are objective, and not feeling it means something is wrong.
I would postulate that disgust for certain sexualities/sexual fetishes is objective as well and if there is no disgust for those things in someone, that also means something is wrong.
@@kitalalaris not sure. It depends on context. And I don't think the system will let me use the terms necessary to talk about it in detail.
I think the 5% of the study where someone had a limited disgust response while still being conservative could be those in positions where they’ve become inured to the disgust. Like a surgeon who’s not squeamish while digging in some else’s intestines. It’d be disgusting for the average Joe, but obviously not for the doctor.
@@kitalalaris Particularly, everything involving the rectum/colon/anus/excrement. Including "normal" anal "sex" which pornography has sanitized and popularized. It's objectively disgusting and a big part of why until _very_ recently, most normal people had at least a bit of a disgust reaction to interacting directly with homosexuals.
Thank you for clearly warning us of the deplorably irrational aspects off this 'philosophy' very widespread around world thought in these years!!! I am inclined to think that we are also suffering from a drastic lack of people capable of philosophic thought on the good pattern set by such individuals as Aristoteles☹️
We need people to think logically and with common sense before they can hope to think of philosophy. I’ve seen people think that Karl Marx is a good ‘philosopher’ to follow, as if his policies haven’t killed millions every damn time.
To be honest, I no longer care what happens to the mainstream entertainment media. Let them immolate themselves. They aren't making something for me? Fine! I'll go support people who do make entertainment for me.
I say again, they may have polluted every mainstream source of entertainment with their political venom, but, I don't have to partake. Neither do any of you. You have the option at any time to turn off the TV, cancel the subscriptions, and to support indie creators that respect you as the customer.
This explains their taste in ugliness.
"Be unique, just like everyone else!"
I think this explains why I don’t like Horror movies. I feel disgusted just as much or more then fear. I don’t get the thrill others do. And I think that is because I was not conditioned to it. And I don’t want to be. I wonder if the horror Genera was designed to do? Condition people.
... horror as a genre has been corrupted over the years. It used to have a purpose, but nowadays it's just exploiting its consumers.
Most scary movies nowadays are more slasher flicks than straight up horror. Original horror stories are Dracula, Picture of Dorian Grey, and Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. Disgust was part of horror, slasher films are gratuitous gore.
@@RoseBaggins looking back at old horror movies like Psycho, and the original Halloween there was hardly any gore in them, and they were still able to put fear and suspense into them.
Modern horror has become too reliant on gore and violence, with no subtlety whatsoever.
The Horror genre doesn't condition anyone. It's literally the exploration of fear and phobias in all its dimensions and interpretations. If you use horror to condition people, you're LITERALLY doing it wrong.
Also, it depends on what you mean when you point at "horror"? Not all horror is gore and blood, just like not all horror is even physical. If you think horror just means blood and body parts, you need to BROADEN your viewing knowledge of more kinds of horror subgenres. :/
Could you take a look at honkai impact? The game has a lot of things we could consider "woke", but it felt totally different from the "woke" shit we have.
It also shows that themes that we consider "woke" could be used in a good story.
I would like to see you compare honkai with a "woke" story and tell the differences between the two as they both use the same themes, but seem to use them in very different ways.
Could you give some examples? That might help RJ (and people like me) to get interested in the story.
@@grandarkfang_1482 A gacha game, we only have female characters to play and almost all of them are gay or bi, male characters are most often antagonists or villains.
The story is a little slow at first, but from chapter 7 onwards it gets much better.
Despite being a gacha, you don't need to spend a dime and in the later stages you are given several rare characters to use in that chapter so you are never forced to spend money
it was made by the same company that made genshin.
_Honkai Impact_ was made by socialists. It's an example of progressive people who do not yet feel confident enough to act openly, so they are still acting to cover up their ideas and employ them subtextually. RJ discussed this subject in his last video: ua-cam.com/video/wO0J50NRKjI/v-deo.html
@@HenriFaust why would they need to hide their socialism if it's a Chinese company?
@@glauberlopes1779 only having female characters to play happens purely because they want the characters to be attractive to their players. You're supposed to seek after and desire each and every character, even the ones which aren't very strong, it's literally the business model of a gacha. Most (popular) gacha games have mostly female casts, for that reason - because attractive female characters with likeable personalities appeal both to male and female consumers.
As for them all being Yuri girls, that's not coming from a progressive place either, it's because that makes these characters more appealing to the fans (again, both male and female). Something about girls being very close and trusting with one another (in a normal, platonic way) makes most people happy, and want to be friends with those girls. And the Yuri stuff is like "extra close" in people's minds. They don't see these girls as actually romantically involved with each other (even as they post Yuri fanarts), and these companies are extremely careful to never show anything too sexual between them; great effort is made to make sure you can always dismiss these girls as just "very good friends", because that's what actually appeals to people, not the romantic tension.
Never acknowledging the Indian Buddhist and Egyptian influence on the Greeks. Will was something much more ancient than Greece.
Buddha lived around 500-400 BC, so he would've been roughly contemporary with the Greece of Athens' Golden age.
Agreed that these ideas are certainly more ancient than Greece, but that was the lens which built Western Civilization (well, one half of that lens)
Vonnegut seems quotable here for the writers at Marvel and DC today…..”we are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful what we pretend to be.”
Thanks again RJ for another great discussion.
This is the exact philosophy of Mariko Tamaki, One of the current comic writer ‘luminaries’.
4:02 That's because, conservatively speaking, two-thirds of philosophers are cut from the same cloth as Michel Foucault. Yes, even the "religious" ones.
I recently watched the Xmen Animated Series episode with Lady Deathstrike in it. She was so cringe lol
Well, to be fair, she couldn't exactly be portrayed 100% accurately to her comic book appearance and origin because of ridiculous censorship in a 1990s children's animated television series. 😕
Another great (and inspiring) video, brother! The part about escapism was a climactic showdown in and of itself.
such a underrated channel, each video have such information about comics and such that I think: ´´There´s no way that this lad can top it``, just to find out that you toped it. Bloody diabolical, in a good sense
My take, these "writers" write about themselves not for the readers.
That's not even a "take", that's a given. They also write stories based on what Twitter tells them life is like, not ACTUAL life, because that requires having perspective and a wealth of life experience, which they cut themselves off from completely, because they fear everything and everyone that isn't them, because everything in life "triggers" them.
I love it that RJ gives us his sources
It's hard to disgust someone who is already disguisting inside.
The conflict between worldviews that there is no fixed human nature vs human nature is fixed, implying economic and social laws that must be respected, is the basis of Thomas Sowell's "A Conflict of Visions" delving into why people who disagree on X view and disagree on Y seemingly unrelated view.
It's a good read to understand the root difference in progressive vs conservative / libertarian ideology.
Watched a few of your videos in the last couple of days. You’ve gained a new subscriber. I love how well thought out your videos are, and how you break down some of the ideas that sometimes go over my head to where I can better understand them.
And villains aren't immune to this gender-swap crap, either.
Look what they've done with Doctor Octopus.
What did they do with Dock Ock? I really hope you're talking about Laughing Octopus from Metal Gear.
@@kohaiame2691 No, I mean Doc Ock!
They're phasing out Otto and replacing him with a woman. Disney has kickstarted this phase-out with their show _Spidey and his Amazing Friends._
Yet again a brilliant video dude, keep them coming.
Those were some great covers you put up btw. (from a technical perspective) I especially liked the anthology titles that placed the story titles in creative ways. And the use of negative space.
Hats off To you!! Every word of argument you made?? It falls into it's right place!! "Logic" and "Truth"?? To these "progressives" words like that are plague to them... Coz to their belief they're above God...and Satan is a saviour!! But what they don't realise is, it's in our (Humans) imprint and nature, has been for thousands of years... the way we tell stories and see truth and logic. So it doesn't matter if they try for years on end to say otherwise?! The world will never revolve around them, and will always find a way to correct itself. And their story telling will always be disgusting!!👊
Well, in their eyes "God" would be an oppressor (if they actually believed in God), and the Devil misunderstood. And they would only accept "God" if "God" caved to their wishes, which shows you the massive level of narcissists you have to deal with. These are also the same people who would tell you that no "Higher Power has a monopoly on absolute morality", and completely proves the point that NO PERSON (not even those posing as moral crusaders) is in an actual position to be talking about morality and ethics AT ALL. They are pseudo-intellectuals who think they are somehow endowed by ultimate knowledge and awareness, while being COMPLETELY unaware and don't care about their own actions and its consequences on others AT ALL (because they believe that only "bad people" are hurt, and that's okay for them because as they and their "Enlightened Ones" get served, that is all that matters). Now that's one HELL of a slippery slope, and it's even more disturbing that you have both infantilized and deliberately ignorant people riding that slope.
Absolutely on point!! The way you broke it down..... You just nipped it in the bud!!!👍🙏
@@sigmacademy Given the popularity of Islam in that crowd, I'm not sure they would like Satan. Islam doesn't like demons much.
Then there are those "Reddit Atheists" who wouldn't believe in religious figures, & thus wouldn't like any of them as a result.
The welfare state has ensured the breeding potential of individuals that are a detriment to the species….. it could be argued the human race has already reached it’s optimal potential.
Well, the welfare state has always been a detriment to those it was set up to help. First, it makes you dependent on the government (who in itself, is only concerned with its own existence) and secondly, it deprives you of the opportunity to build personal wealth and further opportunities to become self-reliant and pursue opportunities to improve your economic status. It effectively sabotages everyone it tries to "help".
As for its optimal potential, I would argue no, if anything, more barriers have been town up to block, slow down or flat out stop further optimal potential. The fact that everyone is now a ball ready for (or already optimized for) politicization. :/
I would posit that what is disgusting is just as common as beauty, that there are as many maggots as there are flowers.
Also, maggots have their function just like flowers do? :/
Hey RJ. That psuedo Wolverine comic cover art is a re-skinned copy of the late great DMX's phenomenal second album "Flesh of my Flesh". I know because I owned that album!!
cuz the writer or author have a brain of 14 yrs old remember this quote from an woke author "IF YOU DON'T LIKE MY BOOK DON'T BUY MY BOOK" and later "PEOPLE LOSSING THEIR JOB NO ONE BUYING THE/MY BOOK"
I find them appalling.
Agreed, fellow Autist.
Without respect to the nature of procreation, and conservation of traditional family values, that our great ancestors have passed to us, a certain group of human will extinct. Nature will take it's course. As always. It's a fact.
it's happening now. Birthrates below replacement are more common than not at the current time.
What about over population.
@@wordoftheday7650 What about pandemic, famines, natural disaster and even War? History has proven, nature and man's action will balance out everything. There can't be overpopulation. China restricted family policy ( to control population growth ) now backfires. India has the most dense population in the world face severe COVID-19 deaths. So do the rest of world. No one live in perfect Gaia world where people live long enough to overcrowding the world.
@@stormryder4305 The problem is that overcrowding WILL become an issue at some point in the not too distant future. We're already several BILLIONS on the planet, and each of those billions have to potential to increase the world's population by several times the current size, in very much as the current population was the same when compared against the Ancient world. That's largely due to increased sophistication of medicine and other improvements over the millennial has made sure that so many more people survive than previously (and that trend will simply increase in the future).
If increasing suicide rates don't do the human race in first, I have to add. :/
@@sigmacademy overcrowding will become a global issue if each countries has the same constant fertility rate, such as Nigeria. 47.28 average annual births per 1,000 people per year. The problem is, although statistics show constant rising in global population, a lot of countries show declining in birth rate. Taiwan, for example, has an average 1.07 children per woman. United States currently has death rate exceeding birth rate. In other words, some countries are facing shrinking in population. We do not share border like we did in ancients time. Thus people can't migrate freely as they used to be to overcrowding the entire globe. Like I said in my previous post. Some human will go extinct in distant future. Like the neanderthal. Nature never fails to run it's course.
Well, yeah. The goal of ideological subversion is not to make you believe the lie, but to make the lie so pervasive and omnipresent that you feel alone in thinking the lie is wrong.
"Grotesquery is beauty. Agree or be crushed
Being different is normal? TF? My brain hurts just from trying to process that blatantly contradictory statement.
I know right? That was the most stupid thing I've ever heard.
I mean people who put relish on hot dogs are in the minority, so they’re different. But I would still say it’s normal to put relish on a hot dog. There’s no contradiction there.
@@wordoftheday7650 No, normal means being within established parameters. Being "different" means being outside of those established parameters. I don't know the statistics on relish on hot dogs, but let's take mayonnaise instead. It is not normal to put mayonnaise on a hot dog. That's what different means.
The most painful thing about Marvel's Heroes is that so many of them were made in the 60s and they aint getting out of the Nuthouse of Social Justice any time soon...
Totally stumbled upon this video, now subscribed. Keep it up bud.
And here you are a month late. If this video isn't a perfect response to every "pride" event I've ever seen . . .
Disgust is not just about survival. It's one of the very few things that can override survival. If you touched a very disgusting corpse you can go off into wilderness and most likely die, or go back to your clan probably carrying a disease. A primitive person in prehistory knowing nothing about germs would get that "I might have caught disgusting" and go off, only maybe going back after time passed and some cleansing ritual. Fear and anger can't substitute for it. If you want more empirical research on this (I'm at 6:30 so maybe its mentioned later in the vid?), Heidt is on point with this. His moral foundation research isolated conservatives, liberals, lefties and libertarians based on how much they respond to each foundation.
The idea that they are trying to desensitize us is eye opening. I had never realized it but it's true, my brother in law is a progressive and he would always try to get us to watch the most depressing and disgusting movie's.
I would ask him why he wanted us to watch gross junk like that, and he would always just try to insult or shame me.
Also I think it's interesting that desensitization is how they make new Reavers in FireFly.
I've heard the word is the phone around for a bit never knew what it meant and quite frankly last time someone called me that in the form I told them that they were just barking empty rhetoric that they picked up on some website without even understanding it
I don't necessarily agree with everything you say in your videos, but they are always well thought out and reasoned, and I think you do a particularly good job in showing the rational and logic behind your beliefs, as well as your explaining of your sources for your arguments. I always enjoy discourse that challenges my own views and philosophies, so long as it's not condescending or talking down to me, and this is definently one of your strong points! Not to mention that the parts where I do agree with you, I'm on board 100%. Keep up the good work, subscribed
I must confess, I've never been what most people would consider "normal," for good and ill. There were times growing up when I wished I was more normal, but thankfully I and others have grown to accept and appreciate my personal idiosyncrasies (within reason). If anything, I come from a family of proud weirdos. Admittedly, most of that family and associated upbringing were firmly anchored in Christian theology and philosophy, with a strong emphasis on scholarship. Despite how odd my family typically were/are, we were/are generally normal enough to function in society and adhere to basic universal codes of social propriety.
Disgust is a relevant variable in this. Speaking my passions (including... let's say, "aesthetic tastes") often veer into bizarre territories that I'm fairly certain would garner strange looks from the vast majority of people. Which is fine by me. Many of my passions are niche, and I am not inclined to force those things on anyone, particularly if I know that doing so would disgust the parties involved. If anything, much of the media I consume delves into dark territories, with scenarios that should either stay fictional or are thankfully impossible in the real world. The idea of redefining "normal" or "beautiful" to fit my interests or worldview is alien to me (not least of which because, as established, I am fairly unique).
But then, none of this is a surprise. All of the ideas underlying these "progressives'" ideology is rooted in Marx. And to use ancient mythic/cosmic terminology, Marxism in all its forms is a recipe for dissolving the ordered world (bound, constrained by form, functional, stable) back into the cosmic chaos (raw potential, unbound, formless, without function, unstable) from which it arose. To quote John H. Walton's _Ancient Near Eastern Thought and the Old Testament,_ in material terms, chaos would be a substance where you would be unable to differentiate earth, sea, and sky, as it would contain the undifferentiated substance of all three. _This concept scared the Hell out of people in the ancient Near East,_ who thought the world was a great sky-domed earthen disc surrounded on all sides by a the aforementioned cosmic ocean of chaos (which itself abutted the known world through the oceans, springs, and precipitation). They viewed the gods as being charged with maintaining the functioning of this enclosed island of order in the cosmic ocean, a struggle they would one day lose. (Judeo-Christian tradition is an outlier in this regard, as they established Yahweh's power as absolute, and the creation accounts of Genesis show Yahweh _integrating chaos itself_ as an integral part of His grand design for the universe, a potentially nourishing or destructive force that's still utterly subservient to Him at the end of the day.) Chaos was expressed by that which opposed what was viewed as a sane, properly functioning cosmos: wild beasts vs livestock, city vs wilderness, salt water vs fresh water, the predictable motions of the stars vs the (then) unpredictable motions of comets and meteors, reliable seasonable harvest vs famine and drought, health vs sickness, countrymen vs foreigners, national sovereignty vs conquest by an enemy power, peace vs war, judges and kings upholding justice vs naked corruption, etc., etc. Chaos had its uses in measured doses, but was rightly feared for the havoc it could wreak on individual and social scales. Moreover, *phenomena which the ancients associated with chaos instinctively inspire revulsion and disgust responses.* Thus, great expense was taken in maintaining order in the ancient world. This pattern repeats itself in other regions of the world as well, especially in cultures where rulers cast themselves as partially or wholly divine; conceptually, they claimed, like the gods they worshipped and served as intermediaries for, were tasked with maintaining the order of the universe and keeping the forces of chaos at bay.
Socialism and its many derivatives find fault with reality itself, and so declare war on the structures and boundaries that _define_ reality, that allow it to find function and purpose. To put this in Egyptian terms, they represent Apep/Apophis, the serpent of chaos who threatens Ra's solar barque as it travels through the underworld every night. While there are multiple surviving Egyptian cosmologies, most of them conceived of original creation as gods emerging from the chaotic ocean of Nun, with the first God, Ra-Atum, creating the world through the creation of a cascading multiplicity of gods (and aspects thereof) charged with carrying out increasingly complex cosmic processes and functions. The entire cosmology hinged on a diversity of gods, ones whose identities often overlapped or merged as the need arose. Apep represented the complete anathema of this principle, the chaos at war with every aspect of the ordered universe. Every night, it was believed that Ra would die, be carried through the underworld to be rejuvenated, and be reborn with the dawn. During this night journey, Apep would lay siege against Ra's barque, and would hypnotize the other gods to sleep so that he might devour Ra. Only Seth was immune to this lure. This is because Seth was himself a god of chaos (domains included the desert, storms, foreigners, etc.) who had previously murdered Osiris and usurped his throne. Following his war of succession with Osiris' son, Horus, however, Seth was punished but ultimately reformed, taking on the role of chaos tamed for positive/protective ends. Able to see through Apep's glamour, he would spear the serpent in the head, breaking the spell and enabling the other gods to resume fighting. Apep would inevitably retreat to try again the next night. But this was ultimately a war of attrition, and the gods were doomed to eventually lose. The Egyptian conception of the end of the world was couched in terms of this endless conflict, and its implications for a cosmos built on a diversity of gods. Eventually, Seth would fail, Apep would devour Ra, followed by the other gods, before swimming off into the waters of Nun from whence he came. *Conceptually, this meant reducing the many gods into one, and by doing so erasing the structures and functions that define and maintain the universe back into the formless singularity of raw potential that predated existence.* Marx and his would-be successors seek to do the same, presuming in their hubris that once they destroy the world as we know it, they will have the means, knowledge, and moral fiber necessary to create not only a better world, _but a perfect one._
Myths from around the globe are replete with gods smiting mortals for their hubris, but Marx's hubris bordered on that of a devil figure or chaotic god hellbent on destroying existence and committing evil for its own sake. Anyone suckered into this cult is certifiably insane and a menace to society.
When I think about woke ideas aren't entirely bad ideas, but the people who push them don't fully understand them. They come off like pompous ass hats that are are stuck on a high horse. I say this because they're are actually shows, movies, comic books and more that show off these same ideas but in a better way. I think the difference is just how it is perceived by the audience and how much emphasis is placed on it along with how divisive it is. You can look at it like this which would you find more interesting?
A History teacher who lectures you about history and its importance, but doesn't acknowledge new information regarding history or other sources besides what he know or believes. Or a Science teacher with a out there or wild world view and is very opinionated but doesn't talk about it unless asked to and is open to new information regarding not only his world view but I others as well.
traditionalism is a thing some things sould be kept sacred. Or else we might start dumping people in ovens if we go to far the last geration is supost to pass on virtue that was passed down to them. the past can be boring but its still needed. its true thoes who do not know the past are doomed to repeat it.
"A History teacher who lectures you about history and its importance, but doesn't acknowledge new information regarding history or other sources besides what he know or believes". Well, that makes that person no different than those that believed in (fake) mediums, snake oil salesmen or any number of scams or hoaxes throughout history? (not to mention, the myths that each approved (by the government of the day) history curriculum perpetuate depending on what is considered "okay to learn/know" by each school administration)?
Also, wouldn't a "very opinionated person" talk about their wild world view regardless of being asked or not, as well as being a relatively close-minded individual, because being an opinionated person means talking more than actually listening to others?
Also, if you say "woke ideas aren't necessarily bad", what you are actually saying is that you're okay with being manipulated and lied to, because that's what woke ideas actually are - the hijacking of better/different ideas that are then politicized for use in gaining political power by claiming those better/different ideas as a monopoly only they are capable and entitled to use and control.
@@sigmacademy Woke ideas aren't immediately bad only because there is SOME truth to them. Representation does matter but nowhere to the extreme that woke people take it, not mistreating people based on skin color is also not bad, but giving races certain liberties or immunities is crazy. It's not the ideas that are bad it's the way they are executed and enforced. Same thing with feminism it's not bad for women to be equal to men and focus on empowering women, but most of the movement today is just hating men.
Just subscribed like the content. Also progress is good only when it makes things better.
"Nietzsche knew it wasn't rational, he didn't care"
Well when you're criticising something you don't tend to care that it isn't rational. I find it odd how widespread the leftist and Christian praise and criticism of his work respectively stem from thinking his criticism of the progressives of his time was his position.
At the Fear part....yes, I know exactly the studies and the later ways similar were conducted....Thom Hartmann LOVES citing this, or used to....it is in Proverbs that Fear of the Lord brings Wisdom....hence the admonition to the "conservative" to be wary, wariness will ensure that you gain the insight of cultural (and Cosmic, in religious thought) memory, hence "Prudentia/Wisdom". All things that were must go, to the Progressives.
That's because some Progressives have clearly stated that since 'everything' was tainted previously, everything must go. Still doesn't explain why they then infected "previous" or try to remold it in their own image, almost as if they are either hypocrites, or liars, or both.
Congrats on the 20K milestone man! (I believe it will come)
I've just got a refund for a game. I bought it on the Steam sales and at first glance it appeared nice. I've only started to play earlier today and the protagonist felt a bit weird. Thirty minutes into the game, I've realized (almost?) every single character was a gay android. Heck no.
hmm... why wouldn't androids be non-binary?
Which game?
@@MephiticMiasma Why would they be gay?
Would you have the same issues if the androids were straight? If not seems like you might have some kind of bias.
@@wordoftheday7650 The androids wouldn't be sexual in ANY kind of way, because there would be no rational reason for them to engage in the act, because they can't reproduce like humans can, they gain no "pleasure" from the act, and any attempt to do so would be an act of exploitation. They could only be INSTRUCTED to do so, which opens a brand new can of worms.
It seems you might have some kind of bias. The fact that you don't even ATTEMPT to seek clarification on what the commentator said and just slapped back for no reason except to counter with "would you say the same if they were all straight" ACTUALLY uncovers more about YOUR bias than it does the other commentator's.
What's up rj congrats on the subs!
Oh here's a trip down memory lane. I used to love horror comics. Often the good guy won with a fun twist. I liked how quirky that was.
As a centrist, myself, I see virtues and vices on both sides. Neither side is "better" per se than the other and both sides are perfectly "normal" in any given society. From my perspective we, as a species, need both those who strongly feel disgust and those who are less susceptible to it, both conservatives and liberals.
It is definitely true that some people present disgusting material in a way that's not appropriate, almost reveling in being disgusting. It's also true however that some people's sense of disgust is hyperactive. For example, there were people out there who felt legitimately disgusted when they saw mixed race or same sex couples, and there are still some who feel that way. People should be able to overcome their disgust at merely living alongside people making such different choices for themselves, but it's not always quite so easy to do.
There is a push-pull between leftists and conservatives. Leftists would pull us off a cliff if conservatives didn't anchor us, but conservatives would leave us stuck and unable to adapt cultural norms in a way that I don't think would be beneficial in the long run. The big difference is people used to be able to disagree and still have friends on the other side, now not as much. There is a tendency to see those on the other side as "evil" in some way, shape or form.
can I get a source on the experiments from the beginning? the brain scan data sounds interesting.
A society without shared normative values and beliefs is unsustainable.
Great video as usual.
Always learn something new when I click on your videos
"There is no such thing as normal"
Statisticians will disagree. There's also various things you can look at between "median" and "average" alone.
When they bring up the nonsensical that being gay or trans is normal, I retort: No, it's not normal, but it's natural. A natural occurrence for whatever reason, but nothing normal.
That stance also shuts down their "but muh homosexual animals!!1!" argument too. Just because something can occur naturally doesn't make it normal.
By their logic, tumors are also normal because they can occur naturally.
Ty
What in the world was that thumbnail?!
10:30 YES! Finally someone got it!
Great video. I agree with your points.
Fantastic title 👏
Fantastic video.
So, you effectively define "normal" to mean "right-wing". How convenient. [*rolls eyes*]
And you conveniently define "normal" to mean "liberals" using racial slurs on Twitter. [*rolls eyes*]
@@sigmacademy LOL I'm not a liberal.
Ah yes the disgust response that is linked to the moral foundation of sanctity/purity and is way more pronounced in women then in men. Fun fact: the stronger your disgust response, the less open you are to new experiences (thus making conservatives more closed minded than more liberal folks).
There are benefits to it and handicaps.... hence why a society must have a balance of change averse folks like yourself and those who push for changes to the system to ideally make it preform better.
Just subscribed! One more on board.👍
Damn, that's some food for thought.
Are you also Sacred Cow Shipyards?
Thank you!
What issue does that x23 thumbnail belong in? Even if it's a cover issue, it has me curious
I have to respectfully disagree with you.
Not all fears are justified, and I say it as extremly anxiouse person-I control my fears through rational thinking.
I also want to reffer to the cost of giving in to disgust and fear when it isnt warranted-
I have a dear friend. Disabled, cross eyed crooked hands and speach diffucilities. At first I have felt disgust when I first seen him.
I was asked to be his roomie and to take care of him, and through it I have discovered a very intelgent, hard working, ambitiouse man who also run works of charity for children with cancer.
to help him go to the bathroom was never fun.
Was it worth it? Yes.
I think compasssion and kindness are also important.
I am not seeing disgust and fear are alwys wrong-I am just saying,like any feeling,they should be processed through rationality
I think you need to give Joey Q more blame then Sama. He hired her in the first place. As you have said. And she didn't do anything he didn't want her to do.
Well my dad is a progressive
Sorry to hear that
Disgust is not fear
Aristotle reads better in the Greek
as a gay non-binary person I agree with so much that you talk about and i love that you are insightful. you truly care and take time to explain scientifically what drives your opinions and arguments. its so refreshing to hear your take on things because SOOO many people want to just be stuck in a box and they dont want to even TRY to be open minded to ANYTHING.
Lower disgust sensitivity allows an individual to engage with novelty more easily. Novelty is needed so that a society doesn't stagnate and die. It's not accurate to say that people with a lower disgust sensitivity are not normal.
I need to listen to this again, but I'm not sure I follow your connection between lower disgust sensitivity and utopian thinking.
It's psychological, not logical. It turned out that disgust was a better predictor of conservatism than fear or authoritarianism.
It's not Utopian thinking that makes a Progressive. Christians have a utopia they work toward. The difference is that Progressives believe that THEY will create the utopia, by forcing everyone into it. Everyone will become like them, or be destroyed. Christians believe God will create his Kingdom by saving his followers from themselves and their sin. Satan, who controls Progressive thinking, having created it originally, revels in sin and evil and rebellion, and deviation. Our own God-created natures revolt at deviation in disgust. But the more we come under Satan's influence, the less disturbed we become. We see this illustrated by children who torture insects go on to small animals and grow up to be serial killers who torture other people. We see this in the Nazi atrocities where at first the SS troops were horrified and disturbed by what they did, but the longer it went on, eventually they became hardened and would make jokes about it. It's known as searing ones conscience. It's how Progressives have gone from "just let the poor homos out of their closet" to "legalize love" (gay marriage) to having homosexual characters in every form of entertainment to "you better make them that cake and celebrate Gay pride or else" to "hey, pedophiles deserve love too." It's how they went from "legalize abortion so women don't did in back alleys from coat hangers" to celebrate your abortion (the murder of your child) and California proposing a law to prevent women who murder their children even 7 days after birth from being charged for murder. It's the same way we start out with small sins and work our way up. Eve's first sin wasn't eating the forbidden fruit, it was believing the serpent when he said, "Did God say...?" Every step you take down that road just makes it harder to stop and easier to keep going. It's straight out of Satan's playbook from the origin of sin itself in the garden.
Foxes, too many foxes, even If you go for novelty, on traditionalism you have innovation, it is not exclusive to weirdos.
@@dontbothertoreply9755 Boldness and caution... why are they both ingrained in us? Because both serve the cause of survival, not bold enough and you don't eat or breed, not cautious enough and you get eaten by something else. One nature program on owls showed two baby owls in a tree hollow. The slightly older nestling always stood near the front near the hole in the tree, and was getting the lion's share of the food. It grew big and strong. The second nestling got almost no food and almost never got near the hole in the tree and was near death. Then suddenly a hawk landed on the tree, reached in with a giant claw, seized the big fat nestling, and flew off with it. Leaving the barely living nestling to survive to adulthood. So which was the better strategy?
@@anonygent Well, considering the fact that the second nestling barely survived childhood, I would assume that it would suffer issues from that experience. So it's not only an issue of "survival", but actually of how food was wasted on a nestling that not only got eaten, but ultimately didn't even survive to adulthood, and therefore was unable to contribute to the ecosystem that nature is?
I recommend you watch Jordan Petersons video on Germanys Disgust sensitivity in World War 2. Disgust sensitivity can do just as much harm as it does good. If you're *too* disgust sensitive. You'll do horrible things to others in the name of getting rid of that disgust. There's a difference between being cautious of or criticizing a lifestyle and doing terrible things to other people because of your disgust. "Why h*tler bathed more often than you think" is the name of the video.
I do think extremist leftist ways of thinking are disgusting. But by that same token it's also our responsibility to make sure the pushback against it is humane and rational and reasonable, and doesn't go down a dark and extreme path as the leftist themselves. On one hand, you don't want schools pushing and normalizing hormone blockers for 14 year olds. On the other hand, you don't want Anti-Gay gaslighting at your local church camp. Because that's letting ones disgust control you and lead you down a dark path.
Agreed. More than one tyrannical historical figure was plagued by what is historically called Scrupulosity.
"But by that same token it's also our responsibility to make sure the pushback against it is humane and rational and reasonable, and doesn't go down a dark and extreme path as the leftist themselves."
It's ironic you should say that, because some leftists have NO PROBLEM using any and all TACTICS at their disposal, including employing and celebrating selective racism and sexism whenever it suits them. It's why their infiltration was so rapid and devastating because they presented themselves as only promoting rational and reasonable humane action, which was a total lie meant to manipulate and give them easy access to gullible people, from which they could then launch their "victory". You also have to take into account that there are MULTIPLE HARD-CORE CULTISTS who will NEVER leave the cause or stop attacking others - their whole identity and sense of self has been built around that ideology and feeds them purpose to give meaning to their existence, and to abandon it or acknowledge the evils done in its name would destroy them on a mental level and they would do ANYTHING to avoid facing the reality of what they have done. :/
The problem is that we've BEEN pushing back in a humane, rational and reasonable way FOR YEARS NOW, and the only thing it's gotten us is seeing more sane people being fed into the leftist meat grinder (and that behavior even being monetized and encouraged) - to be harassed, victimized, threatened and destroyed by people who claim to be doing it for a "greater good" - their bad behavior gets excused and even ignored on a continuous basis, while at the same time those very same people have the gall to be talking about "accountability culture", while being policed by the biggest hypocrites and fake crusaders who can't even live by the VERY principles they claim to follow. :/
Marvel depresses me, but Berserk keeps me going.
It's important to note that the disgust reaction is absent in "liberal" brains when seeing pictures or movies. In real life, the disgust reaction happens for both groups. If a liberal or a conservative saw something disgusting or upsetting in real life, they would both react with distress and disgust. Some people might conclude that this means that liberals are not disgusted by disgusting things. It could also be concluded that conservatives are easily emotionally manipulated by imagery, feeling as though this disgusting image was equally appalling as if it were real. It depends on how you want to interpret the data.
They actually did go over that a bit. They found that conservatives avoid manipulation in this way by letting their gaze settle for longer on an image, to ensure the thing is, or is not, a threat. Thus, there is more engagement of the rational mind to counter the emotional.