LWDT 7: The Earth and Heavens Tremble.

[Grenartia]

You could equally apply that logic to Hitler and the Nazis as a whole, whose entire economic plan for Germany revolved around genocide and mass murder. Genocide was necessary to create the mythical Lebensraum that was promised, and every ounce (literally) of wealth was stripped from the victims of said genocide before, during, and after their deaths, in order to literally profit off of said genocide (there's a reason they removed dental fillings, after all).

You couldn't for the reason you just described.

That makes no sense.

Read Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR and tell me that Stalin killing people invalidates his analysis there.

"Read this bit of arcane and inaccessible tankie propaganda by the original tankie himself, and tell me his mass murdering invalidates his correctness there."

First of all, he'd have to be correct in his analysis (which would be hard to convince me of in the first place). Secondly, you cannot truly separate mass murder (which falls under either foreign or domestic policy decisions, depending on who is being murdered en masse) from their economic policies, because economic policies inform domestic and foreign policies, and vice versa.

Someone has clearly never watched Contrapoints, Hbomberguy, PhilosophyTube, Shaun, or Three Arrows.

Tbh I don't like any of those people. They're too dismissive of ideas they don't agree with, mainly.

And? I think everyone should reserve the right to be dismissive of ideas they don't agree with. I'll dismiss the shit out of Flat Earth, fascism, capitalism, and every other inherently terrible idea.

Someone has clearly never watched Contrapoints, Hbomberguy, PhilosophyTube, Shaun, or Three Arrows.

I've tried Contrapoints, Hbomberguy, and PhilosophyTube, but not Shaun and Three Arrows. I found Hbomberguy and PhilosophyTube really, really annoying. Contrapoints is actually pretty good, but she's the only exception I've found.

I have no idea how the two goodbois can be annoying. Shaun can be a bit dry, but if you can get past that, he's good, and Three Arrows is a bit more entertaining, and is generally the anti-Kraut and Tea. Big Joel is also a good one, not as entertaining as Hbomb, Olly, or Contra, but he has his moments.

I've tried Contrapoints, Hbomberguy, and PhilosophyTube, but not Shaun and Three Arrows. I found Hbomberguy and PhilosophyTube really, really annoying. Contrapoints is actually pretty good, but she's the only exception I've found.

I found Contra obnoxious. Hbomberguy's an asshole and annoying, and I never tried the other three, as they never came on to my radar.

I suppose, if something you support is on the receiving end of a Contrapoints takedown, she can come across as obnoxious, but honestly, its less so than Sargon of Akkad or even Armored Skeptic when they're doing some kind of takedown.

I still don't know how Hbomb is annoying, or even an asshole, unless you're overly sympathetic to actual rapist Roosh V, actual Nazi The Golden One, fucking Sargon (who seems to be the midpoint between those two), or unironic bully against children Graham Linehan.

Obviously, I stan Contra, Shaun, Ollie, Hbomb, etc., but of course I don't believe that everyone on the left is obligated to like them.

Obvs.

I found Contra obnoxious. Hbomberguy's an asshole and annoying, and I never tried the other three, as they never came on to my radar.

I don't watch any political youtuber religiously, I mostly pop in and out if they have something interesting to say on a topic.

I don't find Contra obnoxious, I just really don't like how her and PhilosophyTube clearly don't actually care about the philosophical views of the people they disagree with, which means they never address them.

At least in Contra's case, its probably because she's pretty disillusioned with the field (she made a video about why she left academia, its one of her early, pre-transition ones).

She makes some good points about White Nationalists and the concept of the West.

She does, but she often dismisses actual well-known philosophers as "mental masturbators."

I mean, who better than someone who is an expert in the field to make such a statement about people in the field?

Lego is great all around, though.

Until you step on one.

I don't feel pain in my feet, and I grew up accidentally stepping on legos all the time.

[United Muscovite Nations]

You couldn't for the reason you just described.

That makes no sense.

Read Economic Problems of Socialism in the USSR and tell me that Stalin killing people invalidates his analysis there.

"Read this bit of arcane and inaccessible tankie propaganda by the original tankie himself, and tell me his mass murdering invalidates his correctness there."

First of all, he'd have to be correct in his analysis (which would be hard to convince me of in the first place). Secondly, you cannot truly separate mass murder (which falls under either foreign or domestic policy decisions, depending on who is being murdered en masse) from their economic policies, because economic policies inform domestic and foreign policies, and vice versa.

Tbh I don't like any of those people. They're too dismissive of ideas they don't agree with, mainly.

And? I think everyone should reserve the right to be dismissive of ideas they don't agree with. I'll dismiss the shit out of Flat Earth, fascism, capitalism, and every other inherently terrible idea.

I've tried Contrapoints, Hbomberguy, and PhilosophyTube, but not Shaun and Three Arrows. I found Hbomberguy and PhilosophyTube really, really annoying. Contrapoints is actually pretty good, but she's the only exception I've found.

I have no idea how the two goodbois can be annoying. Shaun can be a bit dry, but if you can get past that, he's good, and Three Arrows is a bit more entertaining, and is generally the anti-Kraut and Tea. Big Joel is also a good one, not as entertaining as Hbomb, Olly, or Contra, but he has his moments.

I found Contra obnoxious. Hbomberguy's an asshole and annoying, and I never tried the other three, as they never came on to my radar.

I suppose, if something you support is on the receiving end of a Contrapoints takedown, she can come across as obnoxious, but honestly, its less so than Sargon of Akkad or even Armored Skeptic when they're doing some kind of takedown.

I still don't know how Hbomb is annoying, or even an asshole, unless you're overly sympathetic to actual rapist Roosh V, actual Nazi The Golden One, fucking Sargon (who seems to be the midpoint between those two), or unironic bully against children Graham Linehan.

Obviously, I stan Contra, Shaun, Ollie, Hbomb, etc., but of course I don't believe that everyone on the left is obligated to like them.

Obvs.

I don't find Contra obnoxious, I just really don't like how her and PhilosophyTube clearly don't actually care about the philosophical views of the people they disagree with, which means they never address them.

At least in Contra's case, its probably because she's pretty disillusioned with the field (she made a video about why she left academia, its one of her early, pre-transition ones).

She does, but she often dismisses actual well-known philosophers as "mental masturbators."

I mean, who better than someone who is an expert in the field to make such a statement about people in the field?

Until you step on one.

I don't feel pain in my feet, and I grew up accidentally stepping on legos all the time.

She's not an expert in the field, she flunked out.

And it's not a piece of tankie propaganda, it's an economic treatise.

And calling someone a "mental masturbator" is just a way to dismiss their point without addressing it, which she (but more philosophytube) does.

[First American Empire]

Someone has clearly never watched Contrapoints, Hbomberguy, PhilosophyTube, Shaun, or Three Arrows.

I've tried Contrapoints, Hbomberguy, and PhilosophyTube, but not Shaun and Three Arrows. I found Hbomberguy and PhilosophyTube really, really annoying. Contrapoints is actually pretty good, but she's the only exception I've found.

I've tried watching a bit of Shaun and Three Arrows today. I found Shaun too annoying to listen to, but Three Arrows seems really good and I'm planning to watch him more.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Geez, DI, they only asked a question.

Geez, Xeno, it's only a bit of sarcasm in response to chronic laziness

Geez, DI, it's only a bit of devil's advocacy in response to chronic sarcasm.

[Grenartia]

She's not an expert in the field, she flunked out.

>has a masters degree in Philosophy, taught it to undergrads while in a PhD program
>not an expert; flunked out

And it's not a piece of tankie propaganda, it's an economic treatise.

Just because its one, doesn't mean it can't be the other. The Austrian School's more prominent members wrote economic treatises as well. And they are arguably just as much ancap propaganda as Stalin's treatises are tankie propaganda.

And calling someone a "mental masturbator" is just a way to dismiss their point without addressing it, which she (but more philosophytube) does.

You know, it would probably be best if you cited examples of them actually doing that.

[Democratic Communist Federation]

There's no such thing as Stalinists, it's just a name for Marxist-Leninists. Now, there are Marxist-Leninists who follow Stalin, and there are Marxist-Leninists who follow Khrushchev-Thought, but only Trotskyites would dispute that Stalin was the intellectual father of modern Marxism-Leninism.

A more precise term is Marxist-Leninist-Stalinist. There are, as you say, also Marxist-Leninist-Trotskyists. Marxist-Leninist-Lukácsists can also be found, but they have never been organized.

[United Muscovite Nations]

She's not an expert in the field, she flunked out.

>has a masters degree in Philosophy, taught it to undergrads while in a PhD program
>not an expert; flunked out

And it's not a piece of tankie propaganda, it's an economic treatise.

Just because its one, doesn't mean it can't be the other. The Austrian School's more prominent members wrote economic treatises as well. And they are arguably just as much ancap propaganda as Stalin's treatises are tankie propaganda.

And calling someone a "mental masturbator" is just a way to dismiss their point without addressing it, which she (but more philosophytube) does.

You know, it would probably be best if you cited examples of them actually doing that.

For PhilosophyTube, his entire video on skepticism.

[Pasong Tirad]

If we're talking about Breadtubers I'm very partial to Lindsay Ellis and Dan Olson. Not really on the left-left side of things but their views do seem to skew more leftist than liberal, and the fact that they tackle movies, theater, TV, and literature more helps cause it's right up my alley of preferred interests.

And he's not really a Leftuber but Hank Green's slowly ascending. He'll get there soon.

[Asherahan]

So does anybody else think Subverse the Game gonna revolutionize the Gaming Industry?

[Dumb Ideologies]

She's not an expert in the field, she flunked out.

>has a masters degree in Philosophy, taught it to undergrads while in a PhD program
>not an expert; flunked out

To be fair I got a masters in Sociology and Research Methods and took a class of undergrads for a year. And I doubt you'd accept me as an expert in those fields; quite rightly, I'm a fucking idiot.

[Grenartia]

>has a masters degree in Philosophy, taught it to undergrads while in a PhD program
>not an expert; flunked out

To be fair I got a masters in Sociology and Research Methods and took a class of undergrads for a year. And I doubt you'd accept me as an expert in those fields; quite rightly, I'm a fucking idiot.

I'd actually consider you more of an expert than me, but less of an expert than the Sociology PhDs I know IRL.

[Asherahan]

>has a masters degree in Philosophy, taught it to undergrads while in a PhD program
>not an expert; flunked out

To be fair I got a masters in Sociology and Research Methods and took a class of undergrads for a year. And I doubt you'd accept me as an expert in those fields; quite rightly, I'm a fucking idiot.

Your not an idiot you have clear and formulated ideas about politics & social issues. Always remember that is more than most of our peers in our age group.

[FelrikTheDeleted]

I still don't know how Hbomb is annoying, or even an asshole, unless you're overly sympathetic to actual rapist Roosh V, actual Nazi The Golden One, fucking Sargon (who seems to be the midpoint between those two), or unironic bully against children Graham Linehan.

>”Roosh V”; rapist
>Me: ...what?
>*looks up Roosh V on wiki*
>Supports, or at least proposed, the idea that rape should be legalised so as to eliminate... rape”

What the fuck am I reading?

[Ostroeuropa]

I still don't know how Hbomb is annoying, or even an asshole, unless you're overly sympathetic to actual rapist Roosh V, actual Nazi The Golden One, fucking Sargon (who seems to be the midpoint between those two), or unironic bully against children Graham Linehan.

>”Roosh V”; rapist
>Me: ...what?
>*looks up Roosh V on wiki*
>Supports, or at least proposed, the idea that rape should be legalised so as to eliminate... rape”

What the fuck am I reading?

Roosh V is a pick up artist or red piller, the distinction has blurred to the point of non-existence. Actually one of the more extreme ones, which is saying something.

He teaches men how to get laid according to his worldview. Some of it is insightful observations like the importance of physical contact in building rapport, which is usually necessary to get desperate people to take the propaganda seriously.

The "Legalize rape to eliminate rape" point is part of a broader philosophical outlook on women which views them as solipsistic and akin to insects in terms of being more a bundle of signals, nerves, and responses than a fully sentient person.

This is because TRP is less about getting men laid, and more about packaging a worldview about women as a self-help guide. It's one of the backlash ideologies to feminism.

[Ostroeuropa]

Lindsey Ellis, Contrapoints, Philosophytube, Jenny Nicholson (She fucking counts. She just doesn't make it her whole thing. It's just casually woven in to her broader review style.), Armored Skeptic (The cries of progressive purists sustain me. He's center-left.), Sargon of Akkad (Despite identifying as a classical liberal and libertarian, frequently endorses left wing positions on economics, environmentalism, and so on.).

Oh, and Dawnsomewhere.

He is very close to my heart. His Mechwarrior series is absolutely brilliant as a parodic take on modern capitalism.

He tends to do more; "I'll do a let's play, but as a roleplayer. So you get to watch me talk to myself as a character.".

his New Vegas one has commentary on all the politics and so on of that game as well as the weird stuff as he plays a complete coward and so on.

Mechwarrior is a game about robots fighting eachother and so on, so he just made up a story to roleplay along with it.

In soul reaver he discusses the political implications of vampire society and so on, including his discussion of the genocidal race war between the two and how Raziel and the player are coaxed into viewing vampires as persecuted but if you think about it there's lots of clues the humans might have very good reasons for not liking vampires, like Janos Auldron kind of remarking on them like they're just uppity cattle and so on, or how hyper individualism and the resulting ego conflicts between the powerful are really kind of insular, stupid, and lack broader societal context and so on.

He usually does all the character voices himself, multiple characters per thing. Really good shit.

As "Greg" he also does talks on issues out of character and answers questions. He's generally one of those social policy types persuaded by data sets and not particularly ideological, but he doesn't like capitalism very much. On social issues it's more of a "When we change things, things will change." attitude that leaves it up to viewers to evaluate which state of society they prefer, and he's not shy about pointing out potential negatives from changes seen as positives. I really like him.

https://youtu.be/dVMEjDL2fbI

Mechwarrior. Watch 3 parts to get an idea of it. (30 mins for watching 3 of them.).

Private Ray VS Oligoplmart.

Series has commentary on the military, capitalism, and so on.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Lindsey Ellis, Contrapoints, Philosophytube, Jenny Nicholson (She fucking counts. She just doesn't make it her whole thing. It's just casually woven in to her broader review style.), Armored Skeptic (The cries of progressive purists sustain me. He's center-left.), Sargon of Akkad (Despite identifying as a classical liberal and libertarian, frequently endorses left wing positions on economics, environmentalism, and so on.).

Oh, and Dawnsomewhere.

He is very close to my heart. His Mechwarrior series is absolutely brilliant as a parodic take on modern capitalism.

He tends to do more; "I'll do a let's play, but as a roleplayer. So you get to watch me talk to myself as a character.".

his New Vegas one has commentary on all the politics and so on of that game as well as the weird stuff as he plays a complete coward and so on.

Mechwarrior is a game about robots fighting eachother and so on, so he just made up a story to roleplay along with it.

In soul reaver he discusses the political implications of vampire society and so on, including his discussion of the genocidal race war between the two and how Raziel and the player are coaxed into viewing vampires as persecuted but if you think about it there's lots of clues the humans might have very good reasons for not liking vampires, like Janos Auldron kind of remarking on them like they're just uppity cattle and so on, or how hyper individualism and the resulting ego conflicts between the powerful are really kind of insular, stupid, and lack broader societal context and so on.

He usually does all the character voices himself, multiple characters per thing. Really good shit.

As "Greg" he also does talks on issues out of character and answers questions. He's generally one of those social policy types persuaded by data sets and not particularly ideological, but he doesn't like capitalism very much. On social issues it's more of a "When we change things, things will change." attitude that leaves it up to viewers to evaluate which state of society they prefer, and he's not shy about pointing out potential negatives from changes seen as positives. I really like him.

https://youtu.be/dVMEjDL2fbI

Mechwarrior. Watch 3 parts to get an idea of it. (30 mins for watching 3 of them.).

Private Ray VS Oligoplmart.

Series has commentary on the military, capitalism, and so on.

Sargon of Akkad is not on the left, at least not anymore.

[Ostroeuropa]

Sargon of Akkad is not on the left, at least not anymore.

Depends how you define it. What criteria are you using?

[Asherahan]

Sargon of Akkad is not on the left, at least not anymore.

Depends how you define it. What criteria are you using?

That his Anti-SJW Anti-Feminist and Anti-Globalist?

[Ostroeuropa]

Depends how you define it. What criteria are you using?

That his Anti-SJW Anti-Feminist and Anti-Globalist?

None of that means he isn't left wing. This is the problem with the left at the moment, they're acting like if you're not a leninist you don't support communism because the adherents of that view are narrow mindedly arguing that it is the only valid means to achieve their goals.

He has been very clear he supports racial and gender equality, like the overwhelming majority of people who reject feminism and progressive racism.

He's more analagous to a trotskyist than a conservative, if you follow along with the analogy comparing the two here.

Plenty of people on the left have very strong disagreements rooted in observing the problems with feminism and progressive racism politics with how they conceive of these problems and the solutions they propose. It doesn't make them conservatives, even if Trotsky laid mines for the British. Telling people that is not accurate, it is merely a demonstration of the same kind of dogmatic insularity and intolerance of criticism from peers that plagued the soviets being present in feminists/progressives, and they pull the same dishonest and disingenuous shit about it, calling people "Reactionary" for rejecting their authoritarian bullshit because they have the same problem Stalinists did, a linear view where their ideology produces "progress" toward a goal along a flat line, and so opposition to that ideology is opposition to progress.

And guess what.

Once again, it is making the left unelectable. The same personality types up to the same shit again.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Sargon of Akkad is not on the left, at least not anymore.

Depends how you define it. What criteria are you using?

Economically, he is not leftist. Socially he is liberal at best and conservative at worst. He might be a little pro-welfare and pro-environmentalism, but not really much more than the average person.

[Ostroeuropa]

Depends how you define it. What criteria are you using?

Economically, he is not leftist. Socially he is liberal at best and conservative at worst. He might be a little pro-welfare and pro-environmentalism, but not really much more than the average person.

The average person is left wing economically. Their views are simply not represented by elites.
Sargon supports some nationalizations and so on too.

"A system which produces billionaires is a bad system." - Sargon of Akkad

He frequently talks about class warfare, has criticized the classism of the press and westminister, defends unions and workers rights, and so on.


When he calls himself "Classically liberal", he is refering to social issues. He rejects the left wing social views and progressives and calls himself "Liberal" in the "Classical sense" because his audience is partially american.

He has clarified on occasion he means "Social liberal".

[Asherahan]

Economically, he is not leftist. Socially he is liberal at best and conservative at worst. He might be a little pro-welfare and pro-environmentalism, but not really much more than the average person.

The average person is left wing economically. Their views are simply not represented by elites.
Sargon supports some nationalizations and so on too.

"A system which produces billionaires is a bad system." - Sargon of Akkad

He frequently talks about class warfare, has criticized the classism of the press and westminister, defends unions and workers rights, and so on.


When he calls himself "Classically liberal", he is refering to social issues. He rejects the left wing social views and progressives and calls himself "Liberal" in the "Classical sense" because his audience is partially american.

He has clarified on occasion he means "Social liberal".

Good on him.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Economically, he is not leftist. Socially he is liberal at best and conservative at worst. He might be a little pro-welfare and pro-environmentalism, but not really much more than the average person.

The average person is left wing economically. Their views are simply not represented by elites.
Sargon supports some nationalizations and so on too.

"A system which produces billionaires is a bad system." - Sargon of Akkad

He frequently talks about class warfare, has criticized the classism of the press and westminister, defends unions and workers rights, and so on.


When he calls himself "Classically liberal", he is refering to social issues. He rejects the left wing social views and progressives and calls himself "Liberal" in the "Classical sense" because his audience is partially american.

He has clarified on occasion he means "Social liberal".

That quote really doesn't sound like Sargon. You can criticize the classism of the press and defend unions without being a leftist. Also, and while this doesn't necessarily say much, his most recent political compass test placed him on the right economically.

[Ostroeuropa]

The average person is left wing economically. Their views are simply not represented by elites.
Sargon supports some nationalizations and so on too.

"A system which produces billionaires is a bad system." - Sargon of Akkad

He frequently talks about class warfare, has criticized the classism of the press and westminister, defends unions and workers rights, and so on.


When he calls himself "Classically liberal", he is refering to social issues. He rejects the left wing social views and progressives and calls himself "Liberal" in the "Classical sense" because his audience is partially american.

He has clarified on occasion he means "Social liberal".

Good on him.

if it weren't for the press insisting on their artificial dichotomy and baiting people into believing it, they could be attacking him for his comments like "A system which produces billionaires is a bad system" and all that and making him out to be a dangerous lunatic lefty. It's only because the press is artificially creating a polarized bipartisan system, and many progressives and feminists are happy to facilitate to them doing so, that Sargon is called "Right wing".

[Asherahan]

Good on him.

if it weren't for the press insisting on their artificial dichotomy and baiting people into believing it, they could be attacking him for his comments like "A system which produces billionaires is a bad system" and all that and making him out to be a dangerous lunatic lefty. It's only because the press is artificially creating a polarized bipartisan system, and many progressives and feminists are happy to facilitate to them doing so, that Sargon is called "Right wing".

I don't have a stake in this ostro I just posted what I know 100% about him.