The Alt-Right Playbook: I Hate Mondays
Вставка
- Опубліковано 5 кві 2020
- patreon: / innuendostudios
tumblr: / innuendostudios
twitter: / innuendostudios
transcript: innuendostudios.tumblr.com/po...
research: innuendostudios.tumblr.com/po...
sources:
There's no point improving healthcare because we're all gonna die anyway: • Fox News host thinks D...
Illegalizing abortion doesn't lower abortion rates but access to contraceptives does: www.theguardian.com/commentis...
"You can't regulate evil": www.courier-journal.com/story...
Gun crime since gun control in the UK: www.independent.co.uk/news/lo...
Gun crime since gun control in Australia: www.theguardian.com/news/data...
The notion of "if we didn't have bad white people, how would we know we're the good ones?" is loosely inspired by Barbara Creed's notion of the abject, which you can read about in her book The Monstrous-Feminine: www.amazon.com/Monstrous-Femi... - Розваги
I find it truly terrifying how the best way to bond with people you see 8 hours a day is casually state how we all don't want to be here.
Perfect example of Marx's alienation of the worker from other workers. 😔
@@Dorian_sapiens Marx just gave it a name.
@@LisaBeergutHolst Sure. That's what social scientists (and natural scientists) do. They name and describe phenomena. Marx was surely not the first person to observe alienation, but he gave one of the first and best descriptions of it. That's valuable.
@@LisaBeergutHolst That's basically how all of science works. Do you think gravity cares whether we call it gravity or not? Or who we attribute to describing it? It matters to _us_ though; and naming things is how we honour those who added to our shared lexicon of knowledge. That is our superpower as a species. Least we can do is honour those who wrote their addendum to it.
Then you try to hand out cool-aid, and suddenly you're the crazy one.
The entire war on drugs was about punishing the wicked rather than reducing drug use.
It wasn't about punishing the wicked, it was about punishing blacks for being black
@@pawmo3162 Let's also add creating a fake boogie man, when the real issue is capitalism, who loves schadenfreude.
It was a *big* stupid misunderstanding by uninterested politicians imo
@@pawmo3162 (That was the implication - also, they were targeting youth counter-culture movements and the underclasses, not just brothers).
@@pawmo3162 Wrong, but a very obvious sentiment use by black people who did get the brunt of the deal, proportinally.
It was a plan to turn the poor parts of society or those that do not take part in it, into free labour by criminalizing all drug use and possesion.
I love how it always goes like it was cuz they are black, no, free labour is more important to them than your skin color.
The rhetoric that goes:
"why have a public healthcare system, you can't defeat death" moves on the same basis as the quote: "why have code of laws outlawing homicide, people are going to kill people either way".
Oh yes, I very much know. I pointed out that that line of thinking is literally arguing against the existence of laws in general MANY a times. I told this to a gun nut and he called me an idiot. I think the worst part was him actually believing in calling me that. 🙃🙃🙃
Unrelated but I really like your sun design on your profile. Makes me super nostalgic. Remember seeing that everywhere in the 80's.
Why follow religion? People are going to Hell either way
@@AzafTazarden "Why follow religion? People are going to Hell either way"
You didn't get it. YOU can follow religion, and YOU can save yourself from hell. But if people go to hell anyways then it's not your problem and you are not expected to save everyone from it.
Ok but how does this apply for abortions
"Oh god, the house is on fire!"
"Not all fires are harmful."
"Yeah, but this particular fire is. We need to put it out!"
"Why should I? I'm not responsible for starting the fire, why should I be the one who puts it out?"
"Because right now, the fire is affecting both of us! You don't have to be responsible for a mess to clean it up."
"Well, maybe I just care about personal responsibility! You shouldn't be reliant on others to solve all your problems!"
"We both live in this house! Right now, my problem is also your problem!"
"If you don't like this house, why don't you just leave?"
"Because right now, putting out the fire is easier than finding a new house!"
"Even if you put out the fire, there's just gonna be another one. You can't regulate fires."
"We can regulate _this_ fire, BY EXTINGUISHING IT!"
"Well, who's gonna pay for it? You aren't entitled to my labor!"
"Who gives a fuck about monetary incentive? THE HOUSE IS ON FIRE!"
"But not all fires are harmful!"
EDIT: Guys, I _do not care_ if you own a gun or not. Go ahead, arm yourself. Just be prepared to protect the people actually being harmed by mass shootings. You know, the people who are statistically likely to be minorities. Also this bit wasn't even about gun control. It was about white supremacy. You know who's statistically more likely to commit mass shootings? White supremacists. The fact that so many people thought I was saying "Guns are bad, nobody should have guns, we need to confiscate all guns," shows that it is IMPOSSIBLE to say anything on the internet without at least ONE person misinterpreting it, no matter how clear and concise you were.
This is an excellent summary of what it's like to try to talk to a Conservative, and also why it's pointless to try to talk to a Conservative.
The above talking points aren't actually points. They aren't intended to convince you that the Conservative's opinion is correct. They're excuses for the Conservative to rationalize why it''s okay for him/her to believe or support something they know to be wrong.
The Conservative WANTS the house to be on fire. They WANT it to burn down. They lit the fire themselves, and fanned it and blew on it and cherished it like an unborn fetus. The argument is just the smoke. It's what they do to keep people from looking too hard at what they're doing, or to deny and delay attempts to fix the damage they cause. But they WANT the damage done.
Conservatives want Women to be treated unfairly in the workplace and in relationships. They want Gays to be denied rights and Trans people to be beaten and murdered. They WANT Black people to be shot by the police. And deep down, in the pit of their little malformed hearts, they KNOW these things are wrong. So they have to construct excuses for why it should be allowed. And that's all the argument is.
The argument is just a smokescreen. A blind. As long as they can keep us arguing, as long as they can trick us into thinking they can be convinced to change their ways, they win.
I'm not trying to sound like I'm being rude but this wording makes it really hard for me to tell who's right here.
@@cherrycolareal the person that wants to put out the fire is correct
@@cherrycolareal… the one that wants to live? And put out the fire…
@@nirvanaheights You don't need to make me sound stupid
To me, this is the problem I always associate with School bullying.
Me: "I keep getting bullied, and I want it to stop."
Them: "Bullying is a fact of life. I got bullied, and it sucked. Now you're getting bullied. Quit whining."
Me: "But wouldn't it be better if nobody got bullied?"
Them: "Yes, but everybody does, so get over it."
I *hate* this mindset, and it's especially galling to see it come from parents, teachers, and even fellow victims of bullying. There is nothing inevitable about a kid collaring you in the school locker room, shoving you into a closet, punching you until you think you've been stabbed, turning the light out and locking the door behind him.
I know it's fashionable, on the internet, to pretend like you're not emotional, you're a creature of pure, cold logic. The worst thing you can do on the internet is write a rant, because that means you're upset - and if you're upset, you must therefore be wrong. But bullying did real damage to me as a child, and I never want anybody to experience what I went through. There was nothing useful learned by being threatened with a knife, or having a door closed on my hands, or having friends ushered away from me like I was a leper. It didn't make me a better person, and it didn't improve my education in any way. Damn right I'm upset. People, you are not powerless to address your problems - and I'll be *damned* if you tell me it's not worth my effort to try and fix them, just because you're too much of a coward. Screw that. And I will always remember the teachers who failed to help me when I needed them most. I will remember you: Unfavourably.
And to my fellow "troublemakers" - more power to you, comrades. I'll see you in detention.
Agree wholeheartedly
Cinderball, you deserve many internet claps, my friend.
Agreed that mindset is a self fulfilling prophesy. Cynicism and being judgemental is lazily pretending to be "realistic" while actually being defeatist. The people who advanced science, culture and business had a growth mindset, determined to change the as-is.
This is also the same logic they use when the left proposes canceling debts. Everyone has debts it's not fair on the people who have already got out of debt if we cancel it for those who have it now.
It's "I suffered, and so you should suffer too."
@@Gibbons3457 yeah and so continues the ritual of hazing regardless of how views have changed
"You don't hate Mondays; you hate capitalism."
Is capitalism the same as corporatism ... if not, I think corporatism has stolen it's identity.
@@1MarkKeller
Corporatism is the natural end game of capitalism. Well, technically, a single monopoly is the end game of capitalism, but corporatism has the exact same results.
i mean you're not wrong
I don't think you can blame the inertia of having to start work entirely on capitalism. I groan when starting up personal projects to.
Jelle Wijckmans your dealing with the left jelle these people are capable of blaming literally everything on “capitalism”.
To put this Monday issue into a medical context:
Doctor: ok you got a problem, it's serious but it's treatable. But you need to follow a stepped medical procedure. It's not going to be easy and I cannot guarantee success but statistically it's the best shot we have
Patient: nah, too difficult. I am dying anyway.
The quack: I got a solution, this all cure tonic will solve your problems and grant you immortality, no fuzz no muzz. How does it work ? Oh nevermind that, just pay me.
Patient: holy smokes, I am sold.
Doctor:, are you fcking kidding me.
Exactly what being a health care worker is like
This gave me a sudden understanding of my father. Ever since he and my brother started turning really radical-reactionary (2016-ish? Mostly the Trump boom spilling over into Canada, I think.) he's been obsessed with constantly subjecting himself to material riling him up into irrationality over things he finds 'evil', but seemingly incapable of any real desire to change things for the better or avert or mitigate evil, only punish it. In fact, it's seemed that "change" is on his list of things he finds 'evil', with how he spits the word 'activist' in the same way he does 'communist' or 'liberal', as interchangeable signifiers of evil otherness.
Your dad just sounds old.
Obviously communists are evil because they wish to take our individual liberties, but most conservatives in the US believe everyone has a right to free speech.
It's our own little Achilles heel. We believe in small government so we don't silence ideas going against it.
Then the big government idiots get in power, screw the country over until something akin to the 1970s Church committee reveals the screw up and conservatives get back in power but don't want to use the big government power so they just... Well... Conserve.
Well the issue with activism may either be an association with rioters or people in their life who just can’t stop talking about problems around them, which is easy to get sick of when you’re just a guy, not one of the people in power who made things the way they are
Ask the cubans how great communism is.
@@whtwolf100 Ask them if they hate Mondays.
@@1495978707 so the issue with activism is that its doing its job? that you're hearing about it and its getting attention? bringing change? thats what activism is. who cares if you dont want to hear it. its essential. suck it up.
Warning: This video is not about Garfield
A real shame, we should talk about President Garfield more!
ight imma head out
The little cartoon man even looks like John Arbuckle
Indeed he does.
damn it. I wish this had been on the beginning of the video so I didn't have to spend 15 minutes garfieldless
"Talking about school leads to talking about-"
Ah, the educational system?
"-safety drills, and talking about safety drills leads to talking about gun control".
Oh, I forgot. This is about the US.
Yeah, it's kind of funny. They've had gun culture for literally 300 years, it has gotten so ingrained in their culture that doing something about it is very complicated.
@@melon10177 Well it is kinda terrible that children in the US have to train for the possibility that someone will come to their school armed and try to kill them, don't you think? I live in a pretty shit country too, but at least I've never had to worry about that.
Yep. Just buy the schools bullet proof desks, no need to take the guns.
It's real fun over here.
Gun control is A very complex isssue and the numbers of mass shootings are a lot lower then maney people beleave
This is a conversation that has literally never once happened lol that's the stupidest progression of a conversation I've ever seen lol
We just randomly start talking about schools, and we go straight to education skip that and talk about safety drills.....
Here's how that conversation would actually go....
Conservative = I think for the actually number of school shooting we don't need a drill but tornados are also rare and so are fires so a few drill a year just in case won't hurt. Just don't think it's nessary
Leftist = yeah I thinks it's more nessary but seems like we agree it's ok just differ on the need for it.
Conservative = yup, alright I gota get back to work
Leftist = me 2 have a good 1
God. I'll never understand how people can go their whole lives treating the world like it's a waiting room for their specific appointment. No wonder the world gets so fucked.
It's no wonder why alot of people feel trapped as if they're being constantly judged by some supernatural, otherworldly creature even though they themselves no longer believe in such.
It is also why I think many of them don't give two shits about environmental damages and destructive, man made climate changes. Because why care about this crappy temporary world when (supposedly) eternal paradise awaits us?
@@navilluscire2567 straight up! That's a point to chew on!
It's supply and demand. The more of something there is, the less it's actually valued.
'No one's ever really gone.'
'I can abuse my kids for their whole lives, but can exit this world feeling whole because I apologized in my last five minutes.'
Yeah, been there done that. Sorry bud. This is all you get
Because the ego defines oneself as an entity separate from the rest of nature, and one's perception of the world is intrinsically tied to that entity.
"The way nature deals with a pandemic..." I think you wrote this line under the assumption that this would be a compelling argument against the "what's natural is right mindset"
God, how bad it's gotten
Agreed, I honestly didn't expect conservatives to take that position literally. And yet, here we are in the middle of the pandemic and they are doing exactly that.
@@regisglass5464
Conservative dude: Fuck your sick, dying grandmother NO BODY OWES YOU ANYTHING! Now...don't forget to vote for our conservative politicians because they value COMMUNITY over the 'selfish' leftist who say they want to provide universal healthcare that might've saved your grandmother but honestly...she was already close to death's doorstep being old and decrepit so it would've been a waste anyway. **with a smug, self congratulating grin**
@@regisglass5464 As horrifying as it is to admit, this video may have given them too much credit. Because in hindsight, that's precisely the plan they want to follow.
Another fun fact (Ok, maybe not so funny of a fact but still) is that this is literally the exact same stance Hitler took about the "weak" in society. In Mein Kampf he says that the "weak" who are dying from hunger, illness or any other "natural" cause should not be offered any help and left to die because only the "strong" deserve to live and spread their superior genes. And yet most of the population still hesitate to call out conservatives out on their Nazi aligning beliefs. Let's just call them what they are God damn it. NAZIS.
When they try to make that nonsensical argument, just point out the simple facts that:
1) Homosexuality occurs naturally within numerous varied species.
2) By and large, technically speaking, Murder (or more accurately: Killing) is the very crux of Nature itself, to the extent that even the Non-Sentient Plants do it to other plants (i.e. strangling overgrowth, competitive use of nutrients from the soil, blocking of sunlight [even as far as to kill many of their own offspring]). So, they're technically arguing that Murder is the 'right'/correct choice; and that's quite immoral and/or psychotic of them.
3) Yersinnia Pestis (the Plague, tho idk if I spelled that correctly), Tape Worms, Bot Flies, Organ Eye or Brain-Infesting Parasites, and Parasites in general (among near-countless other things) are All 'Natural'. Yet we don't see them going out of their way to deliberately infect themselves with all those things.
4) Cyanide, Arsenic, as well as Snake, Spider, Snail, and Jellyfish Venoms (and Other toxins like Frog poisons) are All 'Natural', and yet we don't see them going out of their way to get those particular chemicals into their system in any real amount.
5) Death itself is 'Natural', and yet they're still alive and breathing.
"BE GAY DO CRIME!"
Well, if you insist.
Sounds like the motto for Gay Firefly. ;)
@@tinydave17 fastest spook in the west
So if I don't do a crime, I'm straight? But, if I follow that logic, doesn't everyone do even the most minor misdemeanor, which is a crime, therefore we're all gay. I hate circular logic.
Don't forget the drugs and abortions
That should be a t shirt.
"We live in capitalism. Its power seems inescapable. *So did the divine right of kings.* Any human power can be resisted and changed by human beings." - Ursula Le Guin
Yea maybe but the old Marxist model clearly doesn't seem to work. I don't think our best bet is to build a system where the sharpest and most driven among us can still reap significant rewards while still maintaining a system where people can more or less work together for the common good.
@@dbojangles1597 Define sharpest and most driven. How do we distinguish between them and psychopaths? Why is being slow and careful and peaceful seen as something we don't want, or to put it another way, why should we want people who are driven and sharp to be rewarded above and beyond not being sharp and driven?
We don't distinguish psychopaths from effective people because we don't elect our rulers. We elect our representatives who, representing us, eat the boots of our rulers whole.
@@Gibbons3457 Simply because humans are most often motivated by pretty base animalistic desires and it is in the interest of societal advancement that we incentivize people to do things that facilitate said advancement. Now naturally I wouldn't suggest putting material incentives above all else. That would be what we would call free market capitalism and I think we both see the problems that have resulted there. I just don't think we can build a functional society out of the opposite extreme either. We can't just expect everyone to sacrifice everything for the good of the collective.
The divine right of business doesnt feel all that different to that of kings
Fun fact: not even Monday is a fact of life. You can break your week into two smaller parts, with a one day long weekend inbetween, and many find this weekly routine less exhausting. You can defeat Monday! As long as you belive it's possible, and try it.
Congrats, you just gave yourself more Mondays per week.
Literally, the whole reason we hate Mondays is because they are the start of the week. We hate Mondays because it's the day where we have to stop relaxing and get back to work. The concept of the day where we get back to work will always exist. There is no defeating this Monday concept, you just have to stop whining and get over it.
@@sabersin7694 their comment was about improving monday, not about making the start of a workweek disappear.
@@sabersin7694 CGP Grey made a video about it called "Weekend Wednesday". It's under 3 minutes long.
the thesis is basically that 5 days in a row work week makes you to exhausted and makes the weeked "wasted" while a more common time off (even if shorter) would allow you to better relax.
2 days work, 1 day rest, 3 days rest, 1 day rest
@@joz534 ok sure but you cant travel or visit people further away if you only have one day off at a time. 2 work - 1 off - 2 work - 2 off is a much better system
My dad said something similar during the year of covid, his exact words were "The bleeding heart liberals want everyone to live!". I believe he was talking about giving immigrants medical care and vaccines. I just couldn't believe that he would say something so cruel and heartless, but then again, its easier to not see people as equals when you demonize them.
Gentlest of reminders that we are going on our fifth year of covid
Huh, I was starting to define the region I live in as "christian atheist" in the sense that everyone here is claiming to be an atheist but its still very much just christianity but without going to church more then twice a year and no praying
The word you're looking for is "secular".
I used to be Christian, but it confused and disturbed me that so many people who claimed to share my faith, turned out not to be serious about it. They weren't turning up to regular church services - they didn't remember to thank God, or say their prayers - and they didn't seem to ever let Jesus' words guide their behaviour. They were unkind, dishonest and cruel, just like anybody else. Eventually, I walked away from the church. When my own faith began to wane, I didn't feel like going through the sham any more. Better to be sincerely doubtful, than pretend you believe.
Most folk use the phrase "oh my god" ironically
I've heard this mindset referred to as "cultural Christian" too. I've never quite understood the attraction. If you've come to the conclusion that the bible is not factual, then why on earth continue to staunchly defend biblical morality? It seems completly illogical, a purely emotional attachment. Yet it is often deffended by those same people who are quick to point out the immorality of accepting cruel and unethical traditions when they come from any other "cultural" background but a Christian one. It's a bizarre mix!
cloud atlas because leaving behind a book is a hell of a lot easier than leaving behind the moral beliefs you’ve been raised with your entire life
Every time I'm having a discussion and I come up against someone's belief that "It's just the way the world is," I feel such a wave of anger and despair that I tend to quit the conversation, or just assert furiously that "NO IT ISN'T," which isn't very persuasive. Thanks for this video! With your help, I might get a little better at talking with people.
Try with "Wait, is it?" and keep going from that ;)
I go with something more like "Only because people like you choose for it to be."
Ultimately its heuristics.
We get the world we make.
Even if this is how the world is, that's no reason to believe it's *how it should be*, which is what they are actually saying.
This is exactly why the Right (and Christianity in general) mostly opposes legalizing drug use, legalizing prostitution. Not being able to punish the people who traditionally were shunned because they were evil is the same as saying they're not evil, they're good. As good as any other God-fearing person. Acknowledging a problem can't be punished away, since people keep doing it anyway, and finding other ways to tackle the problem is the same as saying drug use and prostitution is something perfectly fine, no problem with it whatsoever. They already decided those are evil things, so they dig in.
No it’s because they can’t regulate and tax those things nationwide. And obviously if something is bad, you wouldn’t want it in your place of residence.
@@SunnyExMusic that makes less than zero sense because legalization is the only pathway to regulating and taxing drug use *at all.*
@@MsScarletwings yeah and that makes shit stupid expensive. Ask any pot head where they get their shit from. Unless it’s medical or they’re rich asf it’ll be from a plug not a dispensary.
@@SunnyExMusic It's much harder to regulate drugs when they're illegal.
Take for example when alcohol was banned in the US. As selling and buying liquors was made illegal it also meant there is no taxes, no concentration limit, no mandated closing hours, more petty crimes and, let's not forget, lots of mafias.
Common goods requires legalization to have an effective regulation
The Devil’s greatest trick was convincing man that he was God!
It's weird how unchristian conservatives are while claiming they are. Helping others and not being rich are two enormous parts right there in the Bible.
But also damning people to eternal torture apone death, even after a lifetime of suffering because...they didn't believe in said God so they deserved it...somehow this is *""love""* as conceptualized by christianity. It is all about punishment, and sanctifying ONE path, punishing deviation cruelly and without mercy...because God will's it. It is no surprise that conservatives are mostly religious and or have deeply religious roots, because they have what they believe is an *"eternal truth"* (despite centuries of revisionism..) that must be spread and must not be questioned because...who are we to question God and his (self) appointed mouthpieces right?
Except that encouraging success is the Christian way of making the world a better place.
Charity is charitable because it's voluntary. Making a policy to force everyone to be extra charitable would no longer be charity. Soviets tried it and it didn't work.
And where does the Bible say being rich is a bad thing? It mentions that rich people may have a hard time getting into heaven because of their earthly attachments, not that being rich is itself a bad thing.
@@dfmrcv862
So has charity ended systemic poverty and suffering for millions of people yet?
@@navilluscire2567 there's no systemic poverty in the US so, yes.
@@dfmrcv862
Yes there is, and even if there wasn't your honestly going to give credit to like church bake sales for such?
I'm a "Christian atheist" brought up with Christian values, so naturally I'm a radical socialist because that seems like the most effective way to love my neighbour
Curious how most Right-Wing Bible-thumpers conveniently fail to notice that should someone like Jesus showed up *right now* they would call him a hippie.
Bravo, my friend, bravo
When they ask what would Jesus do?. Remind them than kicking the merchants out of the temple and chastising the priests for their greed is a possibility
@@CteCrassus To the Christian Right, Jesus wasn't sent here to succor the poor and the suffering. He was sent here to be a substitutionary human sacrifice to placate God for that whole Garden of Eden thing. If you appreciate and accept Jesus's suffering, death, and (ahem) "resurrection," you will get you into heaven despite your inherently sinful and evil nature. Jesus is the carrot to Yahweh's stick, the Good Cop to Jehovah's Bad. Sure. you should try to be kindly and giving to the poor, but to them, that's only putting a band aid on the REAL problem: Not being saved. (Depending on the denomination, Right-wing Christians see poverty is a sign of not being in their god's grace.) That's why many Evangelical charity efforts often come with a sermon or some other religious strings attached.
Christians of this variety often follow the "salvation by faith alone" school of thought. Doing good in this life is meaningless because this world is fallen, corrupt, and doomed to their god's final wrath to try to save and the effort distracts from the worship of that jealous, wrathful god. (e.g. Recently the leader of the White House Bible Study group blamed the Corona Pandemic, in part, on environmentalism because protecting the ecology places attention on the "creature instead of the Creator.") Regardless of what you've down in this life, believing in Jesus, God, the Bible (oh, and the right way, depending on sect) is the only way to avoid Hell.
"The conservative thinks about people dying of illnesses, school shootings, and backalley abortions the way you think about Mondays."
As someone who lives with diehard conservatives, this is so true.
So, they are heartless monsters with no humanity? They aren't as down to earth good folk as they think they are. I choose humanity any day. They can drown in the blood from my "bleeding heart".
@Uncle Thomas Yeah there's been some help amongst countries in the EU. Itally specifically had some patients fly over to Germany.
@@MLBlue30 I wouldn't say monsters exactly. I'd say they're more ignorant towards their own thinking process, and brainwashed than anything.
The only thing I semi agree with conservatives on is guns. Everything else can go to Hell
@@rpsyco Are they mutually exclusive?
“nothing short of turning the world inside out is worth pursuing” is a really great example of nirvana fallacy. It’s basically comparing some realistic solution to the idealistic, perfect solution, and then saying “it’s not perfect, therefore it’s nothing at all”.
Can we please for the love of god point out that the people saying that “criminals will always be able to get their hands on guns so gun laws don’t work” are essentially arguing laws in general don’t work? Like seriously, you can apply this logic to any law.
Punishing child predators: “criminals will always find ways to assault children so what’s the point?”
Speeding:
“People will always find ways to speed so what’s the point?”
Murder:
“Murders will always find some way to kill their victim so what’s the point of making murder illegal?”
The dumbest comment ever 🤡
Yeah, it's ridiculous and the only reason they say that is to just shut the conversation down.
Very stupid take, because unlike those things gun ownership isn't actually inherently bad, so when you ban good people from owning guns, and bad people have guns, all you did was make it so people with guns can now know when they use those guns to commit crimes no one else will have a gun unless they rob bad people, combine that with many places having 45 minute responce time from police, and yea, there's no argument that the policy did anything but hurt those people, doubly so when you understand how easy guns and ammo are to make,
Well, arguably a lot of walls don't actually work very well. And punishing people who do bad things doesn't prevent a bad thing, but it might deter it.
Prevention measures are valuable but hard to do effectively if people want to circumvent them. Unless you want authoritarianism. (I don't think you do though)
I think it does apply to speeding, as an Urbanist. People speed even though it is used as an extra tax. But, we can make major effects on the speed of cars without enforcing speeding limits. Simply by changing the designs of our streets. Something similar is happening with schools to reduce the damage of school shootings.
In some places schools are being designed specifically to reduce the damage that a school shooting might cause.
I.E. Mitigation.
When it comes to roads, engineers have designed mechanisms to stop cars and make people die from that less. That is also mitigation.
I seriously believe that we shouldn't be giving speeding tickets most of the time. And that making speeding illegal is a poor way of actually preventing speeding.
Or to use stronger words: "Why shouldn't we abolish speeding tickets or speeding laws?"
However, that same reasons sometimes accepted as a reason behind road design. Typically road speeds are set based on an average of peoples speeds discarding a certain percentage literally beause there are some people "who will always speed" And this is used as an excuse to only engage in mitigation efforts like giving gradual deceleration zones and wider lanes.
Now, if you could actually stop criminals from getting their hands on guns obviously it would counter that argument. Even if you reduced the amount of criminals with guns by enough it could potentially be worth it. That is a complicated issue though.
When it comes to child predators, politicians love using "catching child predators" as an excuse to increase government surveillance.
But effectively to stop that you either need to get better at catching people who do it. Or prevent it from happening somehow.
The only reasonable prevention strategy is stuff like background checks and restrictions on the types of people who can be around kids.
Or maybe limited surveillance if you did it in a reasonable and transparent way.
Murders are already pretty rare, that generalization kind of works there. Although, that is still punishment for an action.
Owning a gun isn't inherently immoral. Although, it is a tool designed to kill. Whether it be killing animals, or killing people.
I am against banning guns completely. But I do think treating abusing guns like we would reducing the risk of child predation.
Ensuring minorities can obtain arms is important so that they have the ability to protect themselves from violence. Privileged people are unlikely to ever have to protect themselves from violence they can feasibly stop. Historically disarming minorities has been an important strategy used to keep them oppressed. I don't support the use of violence. However, for some people and communities, using violence is the only effective option they have to protect themselves from hatred.
However, if people aren't going to use something to do outright evil, they should have the freedom to do something as well.
Ban having guns by non-police officer types around schools and kids. Even having cops around kids could have a lot of negative effects. Create systems to mitigate the negative uses of guns that are happening. Ban people who fit the profile of mass shooter or people under a certain age from buying guns. Make it a crime for those people to have them.
It isn't an issue I particularly care about because of self interest. But, I think gun control fits just as well into a leftist as a right position.
School shooters aren't normal criminals.They emotionally distressed domestic terrorists in many cases.
If the argument you mention is being used in good faith, then it is essential arguing that we are better of mitigating a problem if we can't fix it. Rather than try to prevent it but with negative side effects.
To an extent, our society assumes that laws and punishments are an effective way to stop a lot of our problems. And this cultural assumption has had many negative effects on both normal people and minorities and has been exploited by racists to persuade well-meaning moderates to implement harmful or even evil policies.
The War on Drugs has failed to fix American drug problems. However, it has imprisoned a lot if minorities. Allowing republicans to strip away their rights to vote and participate in society. Some people even claim that the drug problems were intentionally created by racist elites as a way to punish and impoverish minority communities further.
Terrorist attacks have been used to justify government surveillance and a restriction of our freedom. As well as making hatred of Muslims acceptable.
Even much smaller things like zoning laws have been used to do intentional harm due to racist practices like red lining.
And in other cases, attempts to use it to fix legitimate problems has created new ones that are arguably worse.
I don't believe like some libertarians and anarchists that laws are a necessary or unnecessary evil by nature. However, I do think that in practice, assuming laws actually work to do what we is a misleading perspective. Although, you could try to argue that against any law. It would only be valid if the law doesn't actually help with the problem it is supposed to address.
Counterpoint to this ridiculous concept:
people saying "gun control doesn't work because criminals acquire guns illegally" is not comparable to your hypothetical hyperbole of "speeding laws are useless because people will still find ways to speed"....because in the first case you are not criminalizing an ACT but the OWNERSHIP OF A TOOL that could POTENTIALLY be used in an act
Basically, if I were to use your same reasoning, I would then be justified in saying "Oh speeding is dangerous and illegal so let's highly restrict or outright ban ownership of cars"....because, just like with gun control you evidently support, I am not criminalizing the act per se (speeding in this case) but the ownership of an object that could be used to potentially commit the act (the car in this case)
And no, gun control laws do not work...I am Italian, gun ownership is all but easy here, and yet violent crimes still happen frequently, mob and gang shootings happen basically every other week, the only difference is that if I want to own a gun for home defence I need to jump through fifteen burning loops and might still be persecuted if I use it to defend myself against home invaders or assailants (it has happened time and time again in recent years), whereas a criminal can resort to any different measures ranging from theft to smuggling one from the Balkans or North Africa to even making their own...and when they don't have a gun? kitchen knives or other blades, large screwdrivers or picks, heavy pipes or bats....after all if I'm legally unarmed or can't use a gun to legally defend myself they don't need an arsenal to hurt me
“Society is the creation of Man, if something is wrong we can change it” Olof Palme
Well, we all know how that turned out.
Erik Solfors Lundberg RIP Olof. Like Hans Rosling, those two great men led the world in change for the better.
Olaf Padme
@@Bushflare Well, I see no assumption "that man can change _every_ aspect of himself" here, or the need for that. A change of one's natural dis/abilities is not needed, if one can create or find an environment or lifestyle that is suited to one's needs and abilities, and brings out the best in that person. Even people scoring high on the dark triad can find a good way of life not detrimental or even beneficial to others, if they find a niche where they can apply their abilities towards neutral or beneficial causes.
@@Bushflare Do you need to physically transform into a car to drive 100 kilometres or do you enter a car that you then drive there? Think about that one cause it's one of the dumbest things out there to claim you cannot do anything at all without yourself having to change before doing the action. It's physically impossible.
This mindset also tragically prevents people from trying to push for shorter work weeks and jobs that aren't soul-crushing, which would solve the problem of Mondays
Exactly. The current system did not form "naturally", and a functional economy couldn't work without it. It was imposed on us by industrialists who wanted to wring as much value from the labor of the working class, at the lowest cost to them. Monday to Friday, 9 to 5 is the standard because it's convenient for the owner class.
Co-worker 1: I hate Mondays.
Co-worker 2: Me too, lets stop the miserable work week by ending capitalism!
Co-worker 1:TO HELL WITH YOU, YOU PINKO COMMIE MARXIST BLAH BLAH BLAH!!
Co-worker 3: It's clearly the Jews, Blacks, Women, Mexicans, Chinese, blah blah etc fault we work on Mondays.
Co-worker: 1: OMG YOU'RE SO RIGHT! DAMN THEM! WE SHOULD STOP THEM!
I have never understood why the former of identifying our current system as a problem doesn't work yet identifying a biological group one usually isn't apart of often does with Conservatives until now. We hate the same thing but not for the same reasons so we reach or are open to very different solutions.
@@Bluecho4 actually the 40 hour work week was a compromise with the unions of yesteryear. Those industrialists would rather you work 24/7 at your job, live by your job site, and even die on the job than give you any time off, sick leave, or safety standards. Also those same industrialists are okay with kids old enough to walk working in that environment because they are great at fixing hard to reach places. Capitalists are monsters.
@@Bluecho4 we need more immigrants to lower the labor market value and make the poor people even poorer it will increase gdp and my stocks
@@Fafnd Yeah that's the power of workers uniting as a class, it's our responsibility to always push further.
This gets to the heart of the abortion debate for conservatives: it's not about reducing abortions but rather wanting to punish people for not being encumbered by religious abstinence and having the freedom to have sex before marriage if they so choose to.
Conservatives don’t want babies to be killed before they are born? They must be EVIL!
....And controlling women. If we are once again slaves to pregnancy and domesticity, we by necessity, have to give up all power in greater society. Which means an eventual overhaul of domestic laws, which means stronger and more effective oppression of women. Worked for thousands of years. Damned birth control and safe embryonic abortion ripped power out of the hands of males. Made society see women as actual whole, realized, intelligent, capable human beings. And all the dumbass Christians said "Noooooo!!! Not God's plan!! He wanted that whore, Eve, punished for eternity by being a faceless incubator NOT a world leader!!"
Stupid fucking archaic, barbaric cult.
That’s basically 90% of conservative policy, make me richer make people i don’t like suffer
@@theveganduolingobird7349 sounds like a completely baseless and inaccurate generalization
@@therealdeal3837 fuck you gonna do cry about it?
This has aged quite well
Nope still BS.
@@neilr603how so?
I won't lie, thought this was going to be about Garfield
It ended up being about revolution :o
Yeah, I thought he was going to be tackling Stonetoss types
@@LukeDoesMusicThings Check Thought Slimes video about him.
Mmmm lasagna.
I thought this was going to be about how the right hides behind a thin veil of "comedy" to try and convert others, reusing the same jokes over and over again that aren't even really funny but spreads their bullshit.
I have to say, I've come back to this video many times, because it's so mind-blowingly revelatory and satisfying to have this analysis laid out like this. It feels like it describes something I've been vaguely aware of, but haven't properly clarified for myself. Watching this for the first time felt very revelatory.
I mean, obviously one shouldn't make a singular model of how ones opposition works and then forcefully interpret everyone as fitting into it, but this certainly rings true in a lot of cases, and it's a very clarifying thing to keep in mind.
It’s a propaganda video using assumptions and faulty logic to discredit Conservatives.
2 years later and the examples couldn't be more topical 💀
These examples have been topical for decades, and-sadly-they probably still will be decades later.
wow i didn’t even realize this was 3 years old at this point 😭 i thought it came out recently
One thing about punishment: we fetishize revenge. I can't count how many times I've heard someone say they want criminals to be tortured in prison, which doesn't make the commenter look any better than the actual criminal.
More irony, literally the bible has at least two stories I clearly remember the point was that revenge is not worth pursuing.
Agree
This is a bit everywhere, thematically, and kinda long, but I figure it's worth it to transcribe it here. Take what you will from this if you see it. Have a nice day, folx.
A man sits in a prison cell. "This is not justice," he says.
His cellmate laughs, "Well, they keep saying it is."
"Well it isn't."
"Then what is it?" His cellmate asks, intrigued.
The man pauses. Then, "Vengeance," he states simply.
"Exactly," came the immediate reply. "That is what it always was. This society never cared about rehabilitating people, or better yet, making it so they don't even need to be rehabilitated in the first place. No. They crave the catharsis of vengeance. Feels good, but it doesn't actually solve anything."
"A-are you saying punishment doesn't work?" the man asks, incredulous.
"No, it doesn't. It gives the illusion that it works, for a while, because it elicits a temporary compliance through fear, but not genuine desire to be better. Punishment, you see, is predicated on fear, but loyalty born of fear will stab you in the back the moment someone can offer more fear.
"You see, fear is fickle. Love is true loyalty. People will both kill and die for love, but not for fear. For fear, they will only kill. They will never sacrifice themselves for it, because fear is self preservation."
"Oh, yeah? Watch your family get murdered, and then tell me you don't believe in punishment."
"Well, of course, I'd probably be so struck with grief and rage that I'd want to dish out the punishment myself. Maybe I'd torture them for as long as possible before brutally killing them, but what does it say about your argument when I have to be severely emotionally compromised to agree with it?
"In the present, you see, while all my mental faculties are lucid, I'm telling you that punishment is vengeance, and vengeance does not solve problems. It perpetuates them."
"I-if this kind of punishment doesn't work, then why do they do it?"
"You know, this is the third time I've been back in prison. Each offense was more serious than the previous. The first time I got out, I could not make any money. Had that stigma of being an ex-con. I made a lot of connections in here, so I had options, but they were all illegal.
"You think they don't know what they're doing? If they were trying to end crime, sending people off to the goddamn criminal college and then preventing them from finding honest work is just about the worst way to do it. But you know what? I bet it feels real good to throw someone in here. A culture of vengeance."
"You think they don't solve the problem, on purpose?"
His cellmate laughs again. "They know how to stop it: education, opportunity, prosperity. There's clear cut examples that show how to actually eliminate crime. So, what's the logical reason they don't take those clear cut uncontroversial steps?
"Poverty is not a bug, it's a feature. Without us serfs, their system is unsustainable. They prop up the exceptions to the rule, so that they can blame us for our failure to succeed in a system that works against us. Every. Step. Of the way. They need it to be this way, so that they can hoard success.
"They rig the game and call it a fair competition, a meritocracy. When, in actuality, a meritocracy is the last thing they want. The losers don't even get what they need to survive, while the winners take *everything*.
"Is that justice? Meritocracy," he laughs.
- Darkmatter2525 "Vengeance" (this part begins at about 5:43)
Link: m.ua-cam.com/video/LX2VeWumRQ8/v-deo.html
Yeah. I’m a fan of rehabilitation and happy story endings. I want someone who did a bad crime to redeem themselves. I hear rehabilitation is quite successful.
@@user-sf9gs2pg1b It can be, when it's done right. It makes sense to deter crime with consequences, but it is rarely that simple.
Because people get loaded with the stigma of having been to prison, even if they're completely reformed and their "debt to society" has been paid, too often they can't find legal work that sufficiently supports themselves and the life they want, so they will, inevitably, turn back to crime.
It's worth noting that Mondays are also a socially constructed problem, not a naturally occurring one. There is no reason whatsoever for people to still be working five days a week eight hours a day to have a comfortable existence. If the amount of labor we did actually corresponded to the amount that needs to be done, work wouldn't be the all-encompassing aspect of our lives it is today, and people wouldn't hate Mondays so much.
I'm impressed how you were able to pinpoint the fundamental ideological divergence between conservatives and progressives. Sometimes in the online discourse I feel like they're the same with just different dogmas--a narrative that admittedly some are pushing deliberately. But you were able to say not just what is different, but why it's different.
You very clearly don’t actually understand how conservatives think.
Strawmanning the political other for the purpose of propagandizing is highly popular on right and left youtube
Exactly, I'd give him the benefit of the doubt and say he's just ignorant but he's making content for such a large audience, he just HAS to know he's intentionally poisoning the well.
this is about the alt right, the alt right is different from the right, these two groups are different groups, and he’s talking about one of them, sometimes he will mentioned the other
ok can you explain then
@@itsathing3369I don’t buy that when the issues he talked about are some of the most mainstream conservative issues. Nobody thinks alt right when they think of gun policy, healthcare, and abortion lol. Those are very mainstream issues. He’s essentially calling all conservatives alt right
You surgically articulated in 15 minutes an internal journey that took me 30 years to work through and that i'm only now on the other side of. Nice work
I'm so glad I had the internet in my hands growing up. I feel like my political journey went hyperspeed from ages 12 to 20 and I've just been solidifying my understanding of theory ever since
channel break lmfao good one
Hey man, at least you made it and glad to have you. Just keep remaining determined; apathy is killer. Keep educating yourself and keep fighting for human rights.
@channel break *you're
@channel break I gotta agree with @Horny Fruit Flies on this one. Using the correct your/you're is more important than using complete sentences.
Somewhat reminds me of the folks that love to say "Life isn't fair" when you try to bring up any kind of criticism for how a system works. On the whole, WE make life unfair for each other by sheer stupidity, selfishness or pride generally. Life can ALWAYS be more fair, just takes more work from all of us to do it.
I always respond. "Actually LIFE is neutral. People are either fair or unfair. Which are you?"
True but then one must ask what the necessary trade offs are going to be when any given action is taken to try and make life more fair. Something those on the left have a tendency to ignore. Fairness and equality are far from the only virtues in need of consideration if you ask me.
@@dbojangles1597 Of course. The necessary trade offs must always be weighed. Just our of curiosity, what virtues are you worried about in addition to fairness and equality?
@@tomtimelord7876 Well if i'm just spit balling here overall societal advancement/functionality and individual liberties come to mind. I would say the former is my primary concern. I don't think a sense of fairness should come before the well being of society as a whole. Obviously you don't want people to be more equal if that just means everyone is equally worse off.
@@dbojangles1597 Nope, don't want everyone to be worse off. I would say though that I believe there are many instances where the common good does and should take priority over individual liberties. For instance, I think heroin should be illegal. But marijuana legal. I think there should be some basic gun control laws, but the legal purchase of firearms shouldn't be banned entirely.
People who see themselves as 'good guys with guns' or 'law abiding citizens' tend to be the most trigger happy and dangerous in my experience.
But that's just it...
MOST people are indeed good guys.. (well at least in functional free societies so obviously blue states aren't good for this example)
And good people don't generally view themselves as anything special
Narcissists that view themselfs as good are a issue but most legal gun carrying citizens are good law abiding individuals
They shouldn't be punished for the few who aren't
Good people want guns to protect
That's the entire point
@@donotlike4anonymus594 "Good people," however you are defining that very ambiguous term, are perfectly capable of making bad choices and hurting other people. Gun control isn't about punishing people. It's about reducing the volume of guns floating around in society so that average citizens won't be put in situations where they may do deadly harm.
@@Crazy_Diamond_75 but you see that's just the issue.. the idea that banning guns will reduce the crime rate is insane... people who want to harm others will do so.. if we're talking about implusive action then there will allways be rocks or knifes or hands with which the violent can hurt and kill others... and of course if we're talking about anything premeditated then banning guns won't stop people from breaking the law and illegally obtaining guns...
Most people don't plan to hurt anyone and have enought impulse control...
@@Crazy_Diamond_75 But just like the war on drugs, you're only making sure it's criminals who get armed and leave the actual law abidding citizens defenseless.
Last serial killer shooter went to a almost gun free county BECAUSE he knew he'd be unchallenged, he even admitted so in his manifesto, while plenty of school shooters have been stopped by armed teachers, demonstrably your "solution" only makes things worse.
@@donotlike4anonymus594 With few exceptions, EVERYONE thinks they are the good guy in their story, regardless of whether they are or not.
This series has helped me to realise how fundamentally different conservatives are to myself. I had always implicitly treated things as though conservatives were indeed simply "failed liberals", as you put it in another video. All I had to do was find the right set of words to explain why they're wrong. We all agree that problems exist and need to be fixed, and that giving people more opportunities to succeed is good, it's just we differ on how we go about it, right? Seeing that conservatives don't like fixing problems, they like punishment, and seeing that they value the "natural order" of their perceived "correct" hierarchy (that is often informed by race and other bigotry), will definitely change how I approach arguments. Knowing the opposition like this has also made me less frustrated, I've struggled for a long time trying to understand them, but this framework appears to be accurate when I think back to all the things I've heard when having arguments.
Holy shit, you went from a normal and reasonable person to an insane man. This is magical.
@@korickarmstrong3468 what i do wrong
@@SauceApple51 You went from being able to respect the other side as equal humans of differing opinion to watching someone make sock puppets out of them and allowing yourself the ease of mind that is dehumanizing them. Conservatives are not "failed liberals" any more than they are brain dead bigots. No one side has all the answers hell I'd argue neither side has a singularly good answer to any scenario given how much each has jerked their knees away from the other but that is why proper communication is needed. Writing anyone off as evil simply for having differing views on political matters is itself mindless and evil.
@@korickarmstrong3468 Yeah I shouldn't have said "conservatives", I more meant far-right individuals. I was being lenient because it appears to me that even normal conservatives do have this hierarchical framework. It may not be malicious or race-based, but they have a deference to some notion of it.
But I really don't think I "dehumanised" them, sure my characterisation wasn't flattering but what do you expect? I disagree with their worldview; I generally think it is a suboptimal way for society to be. I also didn't "write them off for simply having differing opinions" - rather, I outlined the overarching worldview and how I disagreed with it. I write that shit off. Doesn't mean I now reject all conservatives as being evil, it doesn't even mean I reject all conservative opinions, I just reject the hierarchy-based philosophy. A free-market right-winger isn't evil, they just believe that there is some inherent "correctness" about a free market based on individualism and that intervention ruins this "correctness" - and I think that belief is wrong. The far-right individuals who have racial notions of what the hierarchy should look like, they're the fascists and they're the evil ones. You're right though I should have drawn a distinction between these groups.
Just tell the far right
The Devil’s greatest trick was convincing man that he was God!
Then if they pray to “God”
Watching this, I understand for the first time why so many conservatives talk about the public health measures recommended to fight COVID as if they're punishments.
Hey that's a good point
You don’t get a choice to wear a mask do you?
@@crashrescuing4737 You get the choice to kill people instead... because FREEEEEEDOM.
@@jorenvanderark3567 well yes I have the choice to stab someone will I no this isn't the uk
@@killertigergaming6762
No instead it is the US where most who run their mouth about the constitution never actually read the damn thing. If you did, you'd know that mask laws are as a matter of fact... not unconstitutional, at least they are not during a pandemic!
"The easier it is to do a thing, the more it happens"
See also, the voter suppression laws. They're not "suppressing" in the classical sense, where someone is actively keeping people from voting, but they're "soft suppressing" it by making it as difficult and inconvenient as possible to reduce the number of people (in certain areas) voting. Republicans do understand that principle, they just compartmentalize it away when talking about guns.
Oh cool.
How?
What about these "voter restrictions" is difficult exactly?
@@dfmrcv862 You haven't actually looked at any of them, have you?
@@anon9469 i have.
What exactly is difficult about procuring a birth certificate and registering? Banning overnight early voting?
What's wrong with requiring an ID yo vote, exactly?
@@dfmrcv862 People not having a birth certificate or an easily accessible birth certificate; and people not having the specific kinds of ID required to vote.
Note that the kinds of people who are a. legitimately entitled to vote as citizens but b. do not have the ID needed and would have trouble getting it are usually poor people - i.e. marginalized people, i.e. the people who most need their voices heard.
One particularly notable example was the Texas county that only allowed driver's licenses or firearms licenses, both of which were issued by the local police, meaning that the police could simply bar people from voting if they wanted.
@@anon9469 for starters, getting these documents is free and easy in all these states last I checked. And secondly, you're going to have to prove the police or anyone would be barring people from getting these licenses despite them having everything in order, not present hypotheticals about abuse of power.
If anything, arguing "this maybe could happen" just shows it hasn't happened and likely won't.
Not without heavy scrutiny at least.
I once got in an argument in the UA-cam replies about gun control, and the other guy mentioned how other gun carrying citizens can stop crime and gave me a percentage. I then found the source of the percentage, which I vaguely remember being kinda misleading (it was used like "x% of gun crime is stopped by gun carrying citizens" when it was actually something like "x% of gun crime is stopped in y% of situations in which there are gun carrying citizens in the criminal situation"). So even in the other direction of argument, the binary "it either happens or doesn't" mentality is still used. Because a percent of gun crime is stopped by guns, then gun ownership should be allowed.
I came here originally as a far right consecutive, I couldn’t get past the first example with the guy from pay roll and the new guy but I came back due to a lot changing in my life and now I’m very against American conservatism, I got though the whole video and agreed with it all
Glad to see you have come around.
@@otakon17 yeah I’m glad I was able to change course while I still could
What changed for you? How did that come about? It takes a lot of self awareness to grow and change and especially to admit when you were wrong and I'm curious about that process
@@afk_hesh I was really bad, about as far right as you can get and someone asked that if I liked trump then how come I had a Mexican girl friend, after that I basically did what a lot of Christians turned athiest a did, looked for things that validate my claims but came out thinking differently then when I went in
@@kiesarisunny13 very interesting. Well, thank you for being honest. Reading comments like yours helps me believe we're not totally fucked in America lol
I've spent a lot of time in internet atheist circles, and my biggest takeaway from that has bern that a person's stated ideological framework has very little bearing on what they actually do and believe. A religious racist will tell you they're a bigot because of the Bible, and an atheistic racist will tell you they're a bigot because of science, but neither actually derived that belief from first principles. If they've done any work at all, it's only to find a way to square their existing bigotry with what they consider the "correct" ideological label
I really need the religion's guide to keep me relax mentally, socially, wisely, and strategically. I left Christianity because the other religions have their own gods, which one of them are right or wrong or bigger: who is Real, they are just some bullcrap fantasies.
What?!?! No...racism is never squared with anything...it's just an illogical reaction or learned behavior. An atheist will NEVER say, 'I am racist because of science'....that is the dumbest statement I've ever heard. If someone does say that, they're not being scientific! Since all humans evolved from Africa and people are all equally genetically the same. (diverse, yes, but equally diverse regardless of race) Race is a social construct and you can ONLY get to that conclusion through science. And Atheism is just, well, being a smart person. Smart people follow evidence, they don't bend reality to their worldview...you are just describing idiots.
@@patrickkilduff4355 have you really never heard of race science? Never seen someone cite studies about IQ and crime rates to justify their bigotry? No, it's not actually scientific, but that's exactly my point: those people aren't really racist because of science, but they think of themselves as rational empiricists, so they find ways to convince themselves that their beliefs are scientific.
@@patrickkilduff4355 eugenics much?
As a former edgelord atheist I can confirm. The biggest epiphany I’ve ever had was realizing “rationalism” is 100% guided by emotions. Everyone assumes their beliefs are based on logic but like you said it’s actually the other way around. Also logic is completely useless for figuring out the truth because literally anything can seem logical. I’d even go so far as to say logic is what created religion. Even if a belief has no evidence, as long as there’s a tiny piece of logic in there people will cling to that so they can call themselves rational. Whatever that means...
I click on a thumbnail that says "I Hate Mondays" and immediately there is a content warning about "school shootings, abortion, homophobia, racism, religious fundamentalism, fascism and nazi imagery"
awesome
“boy that escalated quickly”
Yeah it was a really shitty monday
Mondays, am I right?
Brenda spencer.
Garfield really went off the deep end
It's weird how conservatives do only seem to process things as a binary, rather than a gradient. I definitely noticed this when arguing with conservatives over vaccines. They don't seem to process it any more than "it works 100 percent, or it doesn't work."
I used the Kevlar argument. Kevlar can’t stop all bullets, but you don’t walk into a war zone without it.
@jennaxoxox4821 That's a wonderful analogy, I'm using that next time it comes up lol!
“Those guys are so binary”
*following statement about how they all think the same way*
@@jettrobbins4238 they overwhelming do, though. There's no contradiction there, like you're pretending.
*Rightoid furiously gestures at imagined hypocrisy.*
@@jennaxoxox4821 They seem to understand firearms better than basic healthcare or infrastructure. In theory, it should work to a considerable degree.
"they'll just import them!"
"They'll import them from *where*, Jerry, from Canada??"
2019: "I hate Mondays"
2020: "What day even is it anymore?"
I don't know what day it is, but I hate it
2020 is Monday. Just, all of it. It's one giant ÜberMonday.
2019: "I hate myself"
2020: "Lmao what self"
@@DonKynos
I hate my
2020 is literally the day between Sunday & Monday.
The most unrealistic part of that opening anecdote was that people got QUIET *MULTIPLE TIMES* during a political discussion. I'm all too used to the guy from payroll yelling over me and using ad-hominem and "stop projecting your insecurities onto X"
Most conservative arguments are literally just saying "No" despite how many valid points you give or concrete evidence you give until they eventually bring up one valid point or concrete evidence (usually taken out of context) to make you look like a hypocritical idiot. Or the easier way which is to have enough people on their side tell you to "Stop making things political, we're just here to have fun, come on" or use ad hominem on you so that YOU look like the asshole for simply addressing an issue which can so simply be fixed or improved on if they looked past their Bible.
@@sandrapark8705 *says sincerely-held belief in jovial tone*
*points out how reality doesn't align*
*repeats belief in more serious tone*
*gently disagrees*
"...I'm just joking, you know? can't you let me joke?"
As it should be
@@sandrapark8705 Had a coworker say the Earth was 4000 years old. After I countered each of his "points," he went, "Well, it's just my belief."
Ugh.
I think you missed the point. The people in the room not actively involved got quiet multiple times. (Some of them probably got popcorn too.)
"not because they don't work but because they *shouldn't* work" applies to so many other things - student loan debt forgiveness, UBI, unemployment insurance, guaranteed housing security, to name a few
In other words, they will look for any excuse to try and not solve society's problems.
If someone fights you every step of the way when you advocate for a solution, you're not talking to a compatriot. You're talking to the problem.
Its only a problem when it affects them. But at that point its too late.
@@1Andydude They'd happily dig their own grave if they thought it was for their gay neighbour.
Their morals are passive, not active, one should behold a belief of what is evil, and don't act against because it's essential to human nature, there's no meaning to mitigate problems, because, sooner or later it will get back on the same spot, or even harsher, the social hierarchy will fix itself. In other words, They "just" don't think it is a problem, they don't even think there's things to be solved to begin with.
@@OneEyeShadow I've seen conservatives pivot hard when their kid comes out. But to your point, there are some who would drown their own child for being gay and publicly admit that intention.
Why are that many people congregating in one office? Have your political arguments over Zoom!
I know! This is so irresponsible with the plague upon us. I blame corporate
@@nystria_ I imagine this was started well before the distancing hit; it takes a lot of drawings to make.
Haha, but maybe not exactly Zoom because it's a security nightmare.
Could be old security tapes, from before the megaissue.
@@youtubeuniversity3638 YU makes a good point; not like ANY of these arguments are new/recent only.
I just had an argument with my dad about rent. I've had this argument many times and it was something keeping me from really believing in rent abolition in capitalism. So I decided to try again because even the creator of capitalism believed landlords were leeches and argued with my dad. We talked for a while and talked about rent and how it's free money and I told him I don't think he's bad for wanting to rent out the land (I mean he's a guy who stresses about money so what else would your goal be?).
Him- "They allow poorer people to afford houses because they don't have to pay the full price"
Me- "Rent means there's fewer houses to buy and more demand which means higher housing prices"
Him- "landlords provide the service of maintenance"
Me- "No they don't, other people do"
And then he said something that had blocked me many times before "people will still be homeless".
This sentiment had stopped me many times before 'that's true, it's basically the same outcome'
And then I caught myself, there would be less. More people would be a to afford houses, people would still have income, it's not the same outcome.
A more reasonable capitalist argument is that private housing creates an incentive for quality, and regulation can control how long the quality can get, if you allow people to sell housing but stop people from selling really bad housing you get the situation we're in right now, where people can only really safely sell to people who they know aren't poor, and rent control often causes the quality of service to drop lower as those managing housing have less incoming capital to fix problems and maintain it with. Government regulation produces higher quality housing often, but in direct consequence stops low quality housing from existing outside whatever public housing it can produce. No free market housing system would not sell to a huge fraction of its potential market, the issue is that currently that's not cost effective due to regulation. In terms of governments abolishing the entire rent system, it's easy to see how developments in effective management of those apartments run with rent money would stagnate when a government covers the bill, there's no real way for those buying housing and those running it to interact in any meaningful way, especially if the State imposes restrictions on the quality. People don't tend to want to pay for things collectively voluntarily, so either rent pays for keeping housing in shape or the government hands out a check that inevitably can't account for all the specialized payments needed in a marketplace, with public funding into the market theres always loose ends bureaucrats can't control for.
My dude you've got it all wrong. There's homeless shelters to house the homeless, and if it wasn't for rent I would be there. The simple fact is I can't afford a house. Especially since I don't plan on living in a shitty college town for the rest of my life.
My argument is housing is a commodity like any other. Just like a nice restaurant, high quality ingredients, or having cooked meals delivered. A nice large house in a quiet community is something people want. Nevertheless, that even in public housing your master is the state or the entity that built the house.
I highly doubt your system would allow me and 1500 sqft house on the coast of a major metro city if all I wanted to do was lounge around and use good produced from The People, heck it probably won't even allow me to do that with a public housing unit. I have to contribute in some form, the only difference is who I am contributing to.
Let me correct your dad's most coherent argument: [Some] landlords [pay for] the service of maintenance. (Citation: The house my parents couldn't sell when they moved, and frequently complained about maintenance costs for.)
Some landlords provide useful services that make things better for their tenants, just like some managers do. That doesn't mean that the system is perfect, any more than managers are, but they both provide a service which can be worth the cost. (Or they can just be a drain on people who can't afford to opt out, but it's not inevitable...just profitable.)
I also see a dystopian future where big companies own all the habitable buildings and people just pay rent to them. If you don't agree with their policy or just lose your job, they also put you out of your apartment. In Belgium there used to be a barrier to discourage companies from buying up housing for rent-profit. You would get a tax-cut for paying the mortgage on your own house. They took this tax-cut away recently. We have a rather rightish government for the moment.
The argument they give is that this tax-cut just raises the prices because people can afford a higher mortgage. That's true, but the advantage is that it puts a roadblock up for the companies that want to own for profit. I think 'the right to own your own plot of land' would be a very good addition to the constitution. Funny how extreme communism and extreme capitalism turn out to have the same endgame.
Something i realized watching this, when it comes to "voting for the lesser of two evils". Its basically just a more complex version of the Trolley Problem.
Youre in a situation where your inaction is tacitly helping an evil take place, but if you actively commit a smaller act of evil you can avoid the worse outcome.
Probably not the first to think of this, but i thought it was interesting
@@KnoxBoxArt Yeah yeah, of course, im not saying its an act of evil really, its more that it goes against your values, in the case that youre left of the democrats. But the base concept of "if you do nothing, you let something bad happen, but if you do something less bad you midigate the damage but actively help something bad" is still shared between the two situations
@@KnoxBoxArt I was speaking more of the concept of "voting for the lesser of two evils" spesifically. That sentiment, and how people approach it, is very similar to how people tend to approach the trolley problem. In the way Innuendo Studios talked about it, you either vote for the better of two bad alternatives, and as a consequence help a little, or you can not do anything, preserve your ethics as not having done any sort of evil, while your inaction makes the worse situation more likely.
Also, im talking in the context of the two party system that was talked about in the video. Where many people feel both parties are wildly different from their own beliefs. Different democracies have this same dilemma to different extents, but the spesific two party system in the US has a lot of parallels to the trolley problem.
Theyre not exactly the same, but i feel that its fair to draw parallels between them, especially as a small observation
@@KnoxBoxArt However NOT voting is, to either a democrat voter or republican voter, considered "an act of evil".
@@disguisedzoroark Where InnuendoStudios is not thinking at all is WHAT SORT of "lesser evil"? Will he vote for the KKK member that is pro womens' rights because 50% of people are women whilst only 5% are black male (therefore not female)?
Yeah, the Trolley Problem is actually a metaphor of those kinds of dilemmas, and mostly an argument between consequentialists (who would prefer to act) and deontologists (who would prefer to abstain).
The situation in Israel brought this video to mind.
Quite a few people consider the only valid reaction to the attack by Hamas to be "Palestinians are simply evil and must be punished for their evil."
Anything else they call "supporting terrorism"
No interest in understanding what motivated the attack, no interest in what keeps Hamas armed and active, no real interest in trying to prevent similar events from repeating in the future.
Just a Monday.
well, to be fair, i've also seen lots of people argue that israel is attacking gaza like it is because "they want to genocide the palestinians because they're evil"
Interesting, I thought the whole point with Jesus Christ the character/person was that he said if you see a person who is suffering you should help now even if it break the Sabbath. Rather than following the rules, but letting him die.
It's important to recognize how little the practices and rituals of Christianity have to do with the actual moral teachings of Christ.
+
@@michaelmills8205
Also, Jesus' most prominent enemies in His story are the Jewish religious leaders (Pharisees, etc.).
I see not much has changed over the millennia.
There were other jewish teachers arguing a similar thing. Moreover, that characterization may be an unkind one perpetuated by the Gospels. The different Gospels have different takes on who Jesus was. We know he died by crucifixion which is only done to people who Rome believes was an actual threat to their power structure.
@@reeddressler9042 The Gospels where written by different people attempt to force the life of (a potentially) real person to fit the structure of existing Jewish prophecies about the Messiah. It's not surprising that the different writers had different views over what the Messiah should believe as well. Add in the the Bible is one of the most heavily revised and edited books in history (both by religious and secular people), and you arrive at the contradictory mess that it is.
It's also important to note the the Jews were actually a major political problem for the Roman. They generally refused to adapt into the heavily Greek influenced Roman society and there was an actual Jew rebellion in the region during the period in which Jesus would have lived. If we accept the fact that the gospels are at best only semi-historical, the fact that the rebellion against Rome was lead by a Judas, and the teachings within the gospels are much more hostile to the Jewish authorities than the Romans become very interesting.
I tried it with my consevative teacher, and I was silenced because of "offensive views", because of being mildly liberal.
That just radicalized me, and now I'm a libertarian Marxist.
Thanks teacher.
you're literally a reactionary if the only reason you went from liberal to socialist is because 1 teacher was mean to you 1 time
@@haideri0313 I dont think that is what they meant, more that it was an event that set them on that path
@@winter945 you're right, that also made me more interested in politics and in nonfiction readings: that made me grow up, in a certain sense
@Dead Ninja Storage I don't think so: he also has been accusing the mainstream media of misreporting the middlle east conflicts for literally decades, from Palestine to Iran
@@haideri0313 I figured it was a joke. I've seen a considerable amount of people claiming to have gone from leftists or liberals to conservatives because another leftist or liberal was mean to them. Changing your political opinions based on that is really dumb, of course, but I don't think "reactionary" is a good description, because then OP wouldn't be holding conservative views.
Watching this in 2022 after a mass shooting and overturning roe v wade back to back and boy is 7:08 accurate
Even though I agree with the stands the narrator holds, I must admit that the hole video is just a debate between him and a strawman. There isn't any real exchange of ideas, the video would be more effective if you use real examples of conservative figures holding the ideas you present
I lo key thought he was deleting comments because I was struggling to find anyone that didn't share the same 3 opinions or was having an imaginary argument with a conservative " "
One thought kept coming back: "He is describing the world Batman lives in, and, to a lesser extent, all Superheroes and all cop shows." Evil is not a problem to be solved, it's bad people that need punishing. Heroes don't do evil, such as killing villains, even when it solves problems, because it would ruin their integrity and make them evil. And besides, taking down a villain simply leaves space for a newer, nastier villain to take its place.
Even the Wire, for all its examination of systemic issues, falls into this pattern, and treats said systems as unsolvable, with all efforts to reform them being palliative and/or temporary at best, and, at worst, making the problem worse, and ruining your life and your integrity along the way.
This! The superhero genre expresses the unspoken conservative assumption that evil is individual "bad guys" who can be bombed or locked up, or individual "good guys" who can be left to address all their individual problems individually via consumer choices in The Free Market (profits be upon its Invisible Hand). If there's a problem (such as climate change/ecological destruction, a pandemic, or systemic injustice) that can't be solved by bombing someone, shooting someone, or going shopping, that problem had just better not exist. Or, just shrug and accept it as an unstoppable Force of Nature.
Notice how Iron Man has a perfect, magical clean energy source that could solve climate change, desertification, etc. and give humanity the Solar System, but he keeps it to himself so he can beat up bad guys, while everyone else is still chugging around in gas-powered cars and heating their homes with coal-fueled electricity?
I want a superhero who works through systemic issues now. Thanks.
@@kevincrady2831 Depends on the continuity. The Iron Man anime makes Tony giving the world free clean enercgy a core plot point. And I've seen Wayne Corp propose similarly awesome solutions every now and then. They're just not allowed to impact the setting long term, because superhero settings need to keep resembling our world, and are not allowed to end. Hence why Reed Richards Is Useless.
Kevin Crady You have good points, but I don’t think it’d make sense or be entertaining to make a comic book around Iron Man going around and cleaning up the world. It’s simply unreal comic book writing, and it has nothing to do with left or right views. However, to bounce off this point, the actor who played Iron Man IS doing something about climate change with AI, we don’t need comic books to teach us how to change the world, but we do need them to show us how to stand for something and make change in a system (traits over specific real world actions).
I think perhaps in general superhero stories suffer these problems but while some of the Batman things present the idea that Gotham will always have evil, I notice in the 90's cartoon Batman also frequently gave villains chances to turn their life around, offering them jobs in Wayne Enterprises so they wouldn't have to turn to crime to make ends meet. He donated a lot of money to charity and helped criminals change their lives. Unfortunately most episodes covering a villain's attempts to come clean would be completely unfruitful the next time you see them, but I think that had more to do with the episodic nature of TV at the time. The show tried to explore the idea of changing the system, not just punishing its victims.
Christian atheism is the ex who laughed at me for being afraid of going to Hell in the same conversation he said gays were going to Hell
wtf
They are.
Praise allah
@@collinchristensen7405 they are brother, god bless
@@collinchristensen7405 they are what?
@@gangbangmidnight841 stfu bruh
theres a dutch punkband called “hang youth” and they made a song called “je haat geen maandag je haat kapitalisme” (which translates to “you dont hate mondays you hate capitalism”) and its a banger
and yet again, conservatives let another "monday" pass with nothing being done
What exactly is that Monday?
@@SunnyExMusic At the time this comment was made, another mass shooting had just occurred with once again nothing being done.
If only there was a law that banned people harming each other
Yes let’s ban guns like Hitler’s Germany and Stalin’s USSR
Something is being done.
In an article about a nurse who was suspended for asking for donations and buying protective supplies when the hospital failed to provide sufficient gear:
> In its statement the hospital blamed the problem on the way supplies are distributed. “No one person, institution, or hospital can independently correct this global supply shortage,” it said.
Which sounds exactly like the excuse from Mr Payroll. Because the situation cannot be 100% resolved by one person, one must therefore punish anyone who tries to do _anything_ about the situation. The situation is punishment that must be endured, rather than worked on.
"No good deed goes unpunished."
Well that's done.
@Ajax Aidy lol you have to be joking
"We don't need to be as gods to turn the world inside out."
I'm not sure how immediately and uncritically radical I am, but I do want a yearbook I can quote that in.
Made me think of Gold Roger lmao
I think my favorite parts about these videos is how legitimately angry conservative types get, sputtering their insistence at what nonsense they are seconds before or after having made the exact argument.
It'd be hilarious if wasnt so depressing, conservatives come to these videos and go "You dont understand what conservatives believe at all! *proceeds to then display every example Innuendo lists in the video unironically*
What if someone made a video about Libersls saying you hate babies and common sense? Would you be offended?
@@neilr603no, we would just laugh because we know this is not true and only unhinged alt-right think that way
You cannot be offended by a lie, so why the alt-right is offended?
@@neilr603ah yes, saying “It’s all about CONTROL.” Is the same as “The left are killing babies!”
This is coming from someone who is Socialist, by the way.
A Socialist with negative brain cells, but a Socialist nonetheless.
I think Sundays are worse because you’re anxious all day and then on Monday you realize it wasn’t that bad
I was always baffled by how many atheists turned reactionary until I realized you don’t have to believe in God to believe in Jehovah’s morality.
To be honest, I don't think it was quite that simple, and I don't think they're quite at a point where they'd acknowledge the more-than-coincidental similarity in morality. They just began with a juvenile rebellion, and defiantly kept going down that path as their allies get more religious, conservative, bigoted and totalitarian. It's been a fascinating, but ultimately painful journey to witness.
What's ironic is that who they cite as the last reasonable group of feminists, second-wave feminists, are in actuality those that have the most man-haters in them. But because of their TERFy views, second-wave feminists are also finding that the only people who hate trans people as much as they do are misogynists.
So man-hating feminists and woman-hating anti-feminists are converging into the same movement. What a time to be alive.
@@tinydave17 A fourth issue is that they also have biases that for example with Sam Harris result in a Neolib Democrat who would support every war in the Middle East. All because Muslim majority countries often criminalize atheism so he wants war against Islamic major countries which do that. Even if all other values are very liberal, the genocidal view against Islam because they do this to atheists doesn't help.
This is a very important essay. One issue I see among liberals, many progressives, and even some leftists, is that they don't recognize the tendency of conservatives to think of societal problems at an individual level and not at system or institutional level. It is very hard to engage with them in a meaningful way without understanding this.
Yes I thought that was a really important part of the video too יוסף
The individual is the smallest minority.
Leftists are reactionary, rightists are conservative
@@Scullex reactionary means reacting to progress , it's a synonim of conservative , leftist are between reformist and revolutionary : since some want to impose the nordic model trough reforms to the capitalist sistem , or overthrow the sistem trough a revolution ...
@@davidegaruti2582 revolutionary and reactionary spell the same, sorry
Literally what Persona 5 Royal taught me, the apathy of the masses is clearly reflected in conservative's beliefs... god I love that game
So you’re not gonna acknowledge that you’re taking pride in gobbling up the propaganda written by somebody living in a country with another government that is way too controlling. Don’t take your political beliefs from a fuckin anime video game. It’s very pathetic.
Strawman
I heard the phrase "culturally cristian" to describe how even atheists only understand religion through the lenses of cristianity and are uncapable of position themselves outside of that perspective.
I've mostly heard that phrase just used for atheists raised as Christian, not necessarily that they have Christian beliefs like hating gays, etc.
Mostly it just applies to holidays. A culturally Christian person has no issue celebrating Christmas or Easter, and probably even love to do so, whereas an atheist who is culturally muslim generally _does_ have a problem with celebrating Christmas and Easter.
I don't even attempt to understand religion. It's more, I don't really care what people believe metaphysically, it's more about their moral code and what they do with it. However you arrive at the answer, if it's a good answer, I'm okay with the method you used! Atheist/Christian/Jewish/Muslim/Buddhist/Hindu/whatever!
@@EvilParagon4 I don't nessicarily celebrate Easter but I do celebrate Christmas, mostly because its not the Christian's holiday they stole it, and from where I'm sitting I'd like to steal it back. the name and some of the wallpaper is Christian but the tree is a pagen fertility symbol, gift giving is a co-opted from Roman Saturnalia, Santa's name might be christian but the figure is an amalgam of dozens of figures from dozens of cultures most of them pagan. the church litterally moved the birth of their god so their festival could devour and co-opt all the pagan festivals that were vastly more popular than it.
the same thing happened to Halloween, the church moved all Saints day to overtake pagan harvest festival and ancestor worship ceremonies but it backfired and Halloween was dechristianized to the point where some fundamentalists think its devilry.
Yeah but everyone knows that and no one cares. Most people don't even know what Paganism is and they think it's just one belief system.
Christmas in its current form, is a Christian holiday, that many Atheists have no issue in celebrating as well, they just might put a star on the tree instead of an angel.
There's even a (in my opinion, cringey) co-opt of Christmas for Atheists using Seinfeld's holiday of Festmas or something like that for the direct purpose of distancing from Christian Christmas, that is weirdly popular.
@@EvilParagon4 Festivus for the rest of us! :)
i had "friends" in high school that held it against me for being an out of the closet gay. but conversely, that they didnt understand why people who were in the closet stayed there. "if i was gay i'd just be out" they would often say. they claimed they respected people more if they came out, while always treating me differently.
Around that time the bad idea of 'if you care if someone is gay, that means you're gay" idea hit the market, so there was this mixture of fake acceptance and limited empathy which made their contradictions more confusing.
Little did any of them know that i was having a sexual relationship with someone in our friend group, who also said the same things, for a decade. i never said anything to anyone about it to keep the situation going. one day one of the friends from this group i associated with the most found out through my facebook messenger about the relationship.
First thing he did after i explained that this was happening the entire time, was say that i was making it up, then that it was my fault or i did something to make this happen while also maintaining it didnt happen lol. then he told me a story of how something happened between them that made him believe it could be true, but it still felt like he needed to blame me.
By the end of it, due to his weird apathy of how the past treatment made me feel, the contradictions, and other things, i left that toxic situation. seemed no one had an issue with the guy in question because he stayed in the closet. He didn't act like it was ok. i never understood this until now. thanks for this.
good job dumping that fake ally pos.
Arbor Smith sucks that you had to deal with that 💓 Proud of you for getting away from those neanderthals
You reminded me of my wife's father. He's one of those that says "I'm OK with people choosing to be gay but..."
You know where that phrase is going. But, here's the thing, he was OK when his brother in law (who was gay) invited him to parties and expensive restaurants, he said he was OK because said in-law "keep things private", i.e. He didn't "act gay in public".
It's the same hypocritical mindset.
@Ajax Aidy The highest horse I've ever seen. Do you see how you come across? You couldn't sound more condescending.
@Ajax Aidy nothing he said suggests that. you chose to extrapolate some bullshit just to respond with that
Conservatives on the gender wag gap:
They say either that it doesn’t exist or if it does, then it’s womens fault in some way or another and they need to shut up because that’s “just how the world works”
Conservatives on racism:
They’ll deny that it exists because Obama was president or they’ll say “well racism will always exist and that’s just how the world is so black people need to get over it”
What do these responses have in common? Showing contempt and complete disregard for any change to the status quo
I love that I just clicked a video called “I hate Mondays” and I get THAT extensive content warning immediately.
Now, I know what I’m getting myself into, I already assumed what it would be about because of context, But out of context it’s just bizarre lmao
Everything in this comports with my own observations of and conversations with conservatives, but the part about "politicizing tragedies" was a big "Aha!" moment. The accusation of "politicizing tragedies" always seemed hypocritical to me. But it makes sense in this frame, because the conservative response to a tragedy, when it exists at all, is typically to single out some segment of the population for punishment or, more often, to make the rich even richer. Neither of these is about guiding society toward a nicer state.
The very last bit, about people rejecting incrementalism and being more susceptible to more dramatic change, also seems very insightful; and the drawing of the skull wearing a beret is glorious!
Edited: "the conservative response to a tragedy, when it exists at all, is typically to single out some segment of the population for punishment ":
Tulsa, Oklahoma. "A black man allegedly raped a white woman, so let's make a lynch mob at the courthouse. A shooting ensues, 10 whites die, 2 blacks. Let's all rise up and kill every black man, woman, and child we can get our hands on, complete with airplane bombing".
Liam Nesson: "A black man did something criminal to someone I care about, so I'll go roaming into the street hoping for *a* black man to start a fight with me"
Edit2: note that these outbreaks don't happen in a vacuum. The people involved are not evil. They have been under a long, persistent climate of defamatory propaganda meant to incite paranoia, frustration, outrage... The "something is very wrong and bad people are insolently getting away with evil, why isn't anyone doing anything about this" kind of atmosphere, where random individual actions are fit into a narrative, hence the seemingly disproportionate responses.
@Mauris ...are you doing apologetics for an American pogrom? Even if more whites were killed at the courthouse the actions of the black community of Tulsa were 100% justified. Taking up weapons against a lynch mob hellbent on killing a man without a trial is good. If those whites didn't want to die they should've minded their own buisness that day.
the beret skull is a reference to the game grim fandango!!! :D
@@elijahthorne303 Ah, nice! I knew the art style looked familiar but couldn't place it.
@Mauris note that these outbreaks don't happen in a vacuum. The people involved are not... 'evil'. They have been under a long, persistent climate of defamatory propaganda meant to incite paranoia, frustration, outrage... The "something is very wrong and bad people are insolently getting away with evil, why isn't anyone doing anything about this" kind of atmosphere, where random individual actions are fit into a narrative, hence the seemingly disproportionate responses. It's the kind of mindset that makes it possible to pose proudly for an outdoirs family picture with a lynched corpse swaying in the background.
Thanks for providing nuance. The problem is systemic, not individual.
"It spreads because those in power spread it" and they spread it in order to stay in power. It's a vicious circle that has been ongoing for long enough.
Those in power spread all matter of vicious ideals. Many of which you no doubt subscribe to. You have got the right attitude I suspect but you need to question more deeply.
@@dbojangles1597 It strikes me as strange that a lot of discussions about politics inevitably devolve into some form of 'I'm smarter than you are so I must be more correct about what I believe than you are'. Are you prepared to accept the idea that some people have thought quite deeply about their political ideals and still disagree with you?
@@stevepittman3770 Of course. I have run into many such people over the years.
"Nothing short of literally defeating death would be enough" ---- ooh no no no, they would definitely not be ok with that. it would be playing god, or death is what makes us human, or some other crap. so literally, nothing would be enough.
Conservatives. Shudder. I don’t even mean exactly political party but rather ideology. I don’t like the IRL left wing either. I’m just a person. I don’t understand this insanity “Christian Fascism” blows my mind and it’s so prevalent. The US has become so authoritative too
Wh
the mentality amongst conservatives that social issues are constants and that we can do nothing against them kinda explains why there is so much victim blaming when it comes to survivors of violent men (be it sexual assault, familial abuse, etc). to a conservative violent men are not something that can be changed, when an assault happens it isn't something done *by* a man, it is something that happens *to* someone so they overlook the perpetrator and instead focus on the victim, blaming them for not being able to recognize or properly prevent the harm done to them. to the conservative, if the man in this one instance hadn't done it, another inevitably would so it's pointless to try and fix men.
side note, I'm sure this is also true for other issues beyond violent men but that's just the main example I can think of.
I get your point but there is also a constant, darker side to some of the violence, as someone that knows 2 bipolar woman in extended family, violence is something that is always either about to happen or it happens if they don't break up. They are attracted to ''strong man'' as they even said, alot of guys also don't know how to recognize personality disorders and think that ''they are just woman''. Bipolar and narcissist dating is also something that happens often and leads to violence.
@@1GTX1 I'm sorry, what? are you trying to say that violence happens because some women are bipolar? this comment was never about the actual violence, this is about the reaction to the violence
they say the same thing about the indians like "well if we didnt come genocide all of them then china or whoever would have and thats worse"
And to them the answer is always: more strength, more discipline, more submission.
“Why didn’t you fight back?”
@@tonywords6713 wow i haven't heard that excuse before but i can absolutely see it being used. these people are ridiculous
This week, the guy from payroll is arguing that masks don't work.
Actually, the argument is "If masked worked, then the W-H-O and Doctor Faucy were lying to us and caused many deaths for saying the opposite less than a month ago and should not be trusted." They have a point as the excuse given was "we were running low on supplies and did not want people hoarding them" which does imply that they let people die if masks are so valuable.
Honestly, Democrats politicizing the pandemic was the worst thing that could have happened to the scientific credibility on the situation.
@@dfmrcv862, they were saying to wear cloth masks, not surgical masks or N95s.
@@lunarlegion5518 The ones they very clearly said "did not work or help stop the virus"?
Like I get the importance of being safe, but what the hell do you expect people to think when you do a complete 180 on a very important subject and your only "backing" is: if we told people this stuff worked, they would have sold out before we could replace them.
Can't fault the people criticizing them. They have a point.
@@dfmrcv862, dude I barely paid attention to what they were saying, I looked at the studies directly. The studies say wear a mask. Wear a mask.
@@dfmrcv862 Politicians on both parties lied and politicized the pandemic. The difference is, the people you're criticizing misguided the public with the intention of keeping supplies for health workers, whose health is arguably more important during a pandemic to keep others healthy as well.
While the people you identify politically with misguided the public with the intention of selling their stocks before an expected market crash.
“The idea that most things on earth have no great significance, that most of the worlds evil is a chaotic mess born of human fallibility.“
*shows waiting for godot*
lol
Union organiser here-- "I Hate Mondays" is also a thought terminating statement like "what can you do" or "that's how stuff is i suppose." A thing people say because it stops them having to think about uncomfortable things any more. A big part of the work in organising a workplace is acting "what CAN you do?" or "Why do you hate mondays?"
It's similar here-- the process of deradicalising a conservative often involves asking why we have these problems and trying to get them to talk about what can be done to solve them.
14:15 Finally, someone else says it. This is how I’ve tried to live my life for a while now, with the belief that “If all evil is a result of humans, then humans have the power to fix all evil. We made it, we can unmake it.”
Well, except for the need to vote for the lesser evil. That one's a cosmological constant of the universe. :)
Watching this video again and rewinding to 7:00 over and over in May 2022 for NO REASON WHATSOEVER.
"straight to talking about Roe v Wade" oh dear...
Explaining away something like poverty or racism as "a fact of life" only serves to uphold the institutions that keep it that way.
Which is why no conservative I know says poverty is something that should not be “worked to be defeated”. They point out how under free market capitalism the global poverty level has decreased across the planet, they point out how a safety net can help people in trouble, and they caution handouts because they know there are people who take advantage of them and make the country worse.
@@dfmrcv862 no true scotsman
@@dfmrcv862 free market capitalism also lead to the enslavement of africans who were then shipped to america, where years later they were released without social systems meant to integrate them into society.
I don't think its capitalism's 'fault' but it seems naive to say well it will just fix itself cuz capitalism is good or moral
@@nathanbruce1992 Well, start with that : capitalism is NOT a political system, it's an economical system. China is capitalist, it's not a democracy (yet they have better healthcare & education). The 3rd Reich was capitalist*, it wasn't a republic.
You can have a any political system with any economic system.The XXth showed us that capitalism might be better to create wealth, whatever the political system is. But we also know the long term consequences of capitalism (climate change, mass pollution, genocide of species, Oil wars...)
______________
* capitalism during a war is special, but still capitalism
@@nathanbruce1992 You're kidding, right? African tribes were enslaving and selling said slaves among themselves for generations before the white man showed up.
So were the Native Americans.
So were the Muslims.
Hell, the Ottoman Empire was doing it on a far larger scale than the Atlantic Slave trade!
It was the capitalist west that bled and engineered methods that not only made slavery obsolete, but they fought tooth and nail to end it.
If capitalism started slavery, it sure as hell ended it.
The "Be Gay Do Crime" picture with the skeleton is my new favorite reaction image.
I work with payroll guy and he swears antifa was behind January 6th.
“How can you think regulating guns won’t reduce shootings but somehow regulating women will reduce abortions”
This argument goes both ways when your someone who opposes regulation in general
@@wjjajshshdbdnnsndhbauhwhshs except the overwhelming amount of abortions aren't procured to save the life of the mother, and also even the most hardcore pro-life groups, such as the Catholic Church, allow abortion to save the mother's life.
Good that he didn't said it won't reduce abortion.
"They don't want fewer people to get abortions, they want people who get abortions to get punished" is my favourite explanation ever for the conservative mindset.
@Jesus Christ Then I suppose you support comprehensive sex education, free and easy access to contraceptives, and all the things we could do to lower the rates of unwanted pregnancy?
@Jesus Christ the reason why it's free, simple and highly effective: it's completely unrealistic
@Jesus Christ do you want the problem to be solved or you just want immoral people to be punished? If the latter, you're just proving OP right
@Jesus Christ the problem is that this doesn't work. There is no evidence of it working anywhere. Governments must rely on methods that produce results. Expecting that adults will simply abstain from sex is just wishful thinking. So is expecting people to want children in this economy
@Jesus Christ you misinterpreted me. Abstaining from sex only works for individuals, not populations. If you want something to change, you need to implement policies. Not even religious schools, where morals are taught and enforced, are able to prevent teen pregnancy. So saying that the government should step back isn't gonna solve the problem. It's like preventing crime by hoping that people will not commit it.
If you don't support any policy to solve the problem, and you only want the government to punish people, how is the sentence that started this thread a lie?
As someone who used to be conservative and is constantly around conservatives, I don't think all of them want something to be illegal so people will be punished, per se. Some are definitely like that. Rather, for a lot of them, the idea of something like abortion being legal means that they are somehow responsible for it as well. If they let abortion be legalized, then they are, as citizens living in a democratic country, somehow partaking in the act of abortion by "letting it happen." So when it's ruled as illegal, even though abortion still happens, they can wash their hands and tell themselves that they have no responsibility to play. Conservatives cannot stand cognitive dissonance.
It isnt even that. From what I have seen, most conservatives just despise how far the pro-abortion movement has gone. Used to be “safe, legal, and rare” but now its “God bless abortions! Human right! Yay!”. Most of the ones I see believe it should be legal for emergencies, but thats it.
@@dfmrcv862 No liberal is saying "Hooray abortions!!". Abortions fucking suck. As a dude, I can't even imagine having a potential life inside me and having to make the choice between aborting it to not ruin my life or not. That's not the point. The point is we want to give women agency over their own body (therefore pro-choice, no one is pro-abortion), because we believe that abortion is preferable to the mother and child suffering because they live in poverty and etc. This is why most people that are pro-choice also support comprehensive sexual education and contraseptives, which in practice us proven to actually reduce abortions.
People who want abortion to be illegal know that killing unborn children is very evil, and so they want that evil to be illegal, as it should be.
@@anthonypuccetti8779 Define "unborn child".
@@LisaBeergutHolst A person inside a womb.
I do want to address your point at around 11:00. Voting for a third party who isn't likely to win is NOT useless. it DOES mitigate damage, because those votes (while they don't affect who wins the election) it does affect the path that candidates for future elections take.
Those votes are not ignored, candidates from the larger parties see them and take note of what steps they can take to get more votes next time. It also restrains them from drifting further and further away from your values, since it shows that large portions of the voting public feel strongly about certain issues, enough that they are losing their votes by straying from solutions to those issues.
Literally the first thing I hear after the school shooting at a hardened school leading to 21 dead: "We just need to harden schools. Why should I be punished for what a monster did?"
That "security" failed because it was security theatre. Those police never drilled or practiced and were completely unprepared because of their incompetence. Had they been properly trained, and not led by a complete moron this wouldn't have happened.
As a Brit, no, the NHS is not perfect, but for the love of God at least we can go to the doctor without going into debt. And as a person who's had an abortion, they'll always happen, they need to be safe
Dead Ninja Storage you are a fake human being lmao
@Dead Ninja Storage you seem lovely
Dead Ninja Storage you are so edgy, we all admire you here.
... that’s what you wanted from your moms, right?
Madeleine Swann And what is not discussed is that you can buy supplemental insurance to get front of the line elective services at a cost STILL CHEAPER then in the US.
Bushflare i don’t know man, that’s a lot of nice talking points for what could be easily surmised as “money not spent properly by fucks in charge who want to end NHS and have publicly said so.”
Look I’m not British, I lived in England for a minute with my best friend who was only alive because of the NHS.
His illness would of killed him in America’s system, so much so he couldn’t even visit here for fear of not having his meds and blood counts.
I’ve talked to a lot of people, in your country, about how they view NHS.
A lot of the hate isn’t informed, whatsoever.
Sincerely, an outside perspective.
When I was told "life isn't fair" as a kid, my answer was always "why not?" It's up to us to change things and MAKE it fair.
The real answer is always "because I'm in charge now".
The status quo is so entrenched that people can't imagine anything being more fair.
Life isn't fair, but that doesn't mean that we have to be unfair.
I mean, if you think about it, civilization itself only exists because we as humans wanted to try and mitigate life's unfairness.
@@ometta7 Life is neutral. People are fair or unfair; which are you?
“how can you think gun control won’t reduce gun crime but banning abortion procedures will reduce abortions” yeowwwww
And just like that..... Roe V Wade just became Guy from Payroll's new fact that doesn't care about your feelings to use.
This Monday is already better than the last one
Lol, u here?
holy shit what are YOU doing here haha. Let me guess, 6 hour, 12 part series on Socialist Revolutions around the world next? Please?
Wow, is it really you? Channels i respect mingling gives be tingling
I love your videos!!!!! Your one about roman egypt left me thinking for days. So wonderful !!!!
Et tu?
Well.. it seems Breadtube is larger than it seems.
I believe it's time we raise a collective banner to show our true numbers.
Ah lovely... Reminds me of a time when I got in trouble for calling the person who bullied me for years homophobic.
do you mind giving more context?
@@omnical6135 The person who harassed me for years, for being gay, got me in trouble because I called their actions homophobic.
@@ratbastard9442 and you actually got punished??
@@omnical6135 Yes, it was deemed bullying when I called out this person’s actions but when I reported their harassment multiple times I get ignored because I’m making a big deal about nothing
@@ratbastard9442 yikesarooni