YouTube Remonetizes Steven Crowder

[Liriena]

Well, yeah, quite literally. Even by their own admission. The government acknowledges that what they are doing right now is trying to have an industrialized capitalist society so that they can transition later on to socialism and, further down the line, communism.

Weird, I thought they were going to the real communism the one that's been inevitable for the better of two hundred years but keeps not happening and keeps killing huge numbers of people every time someone says it's going to. Regardless, we've established you don't like freedom or money so your response to this issue of freedom and money can be wrapped up in a neat little bow.

Blah blah blah "I get my views on Marxism from Facebook memes" blah blah blah

Honestly, how do American conservatives not implode from the sheer density of their embarrassing lack of understanding of the world?

[-Ra-]

Of course not, it's functional.

I would like to thank your irrepressible urge to "own" leftists for helping me prove my leftist point. It's very nice to have my argument accidentally validated by lazy insults.

I think he just demonstrated to you that communist economics are horse shit and that China had to move to state capitalism in order to even function.

But leftists believe what they want to believe.

And since we've already established you have an aversion to facts, who cares?

[The Emerald Legion]

I mean.....they don’t exist anymore.....

Neither do any feudalist countries, but saying “feudalism failed” is a bit of a stretch.

Not really.

[Liriena]

I would like to thank your irrepressible urge to "own" leftists for helping me prove my leftist point. It's very nice to have my argument accidentally validated by lazy insults.

I think he just demonstrated to you that communist economics are horse shit and that China had to move to state capitalism in order to even function.

Thereby contradicting your original claim that China is communist.

Des-Bal accidentally fucked you over.

But what's even better is that you've repeatedly undermined the very foundations of your argument: if you were trying to argue that there is no relationship between capitalism and environmental problems because capitalism is just a mode of production (and I'm going to spare you an explanation of what's wrong with the way in which you interpret what that means), your decision to point the finger at China as a "communist" counter-example undermines your starting premise. After all, communism is just another mode of production. And now, by your own admission, it's not even communist to begin with, but state capitalist.

Your argument is riddled with contradictions. It's an omnishambles of illogic.

[Necroghastia]

Great Freudian slip right there.

As for the rest of your post, it's complete nonsense.

I mean I meant to say morality but the right does respect mortality as well. The right recognise that we are all fickle human beings and everything is impertinent. Unlike the left, the right stressed duty and obligation to something that is greater than yourself, whereas leftism is fundamentally selfish.

tfw the people who want equal rights for minorities and don't think that an insanely small fraction of the populace should hoard the vast majority of the world's wealth are the selfish ones

[The Emerald Legion]

I mean I meant to say morality but the right does respect mortality as well. The right recognise that we are all fickle human beings and everything is impertinent. Unlike the left, the right stressed duty and obligation to something that is greater than yourself, whereas leftism is fundamentally selfish.

tfw the people who want equal rights for minorities and don't think that an insanely small fraction of the populace should hoard the vast majority of the world's wealth are the selfish ones

Minorities have equal rights and then some. And the latter should be translated "want to steal money from those who earned it."

[Ifreann]

Under capitalism we've been poisoning the world for decades, knowing very well and in ever growing detail that we are all very fucked if we don't stop, but we don't stop because there's still money in it. People like Steven Crowder get paid big money to swaddle capitalists in the comforting lie that global warming isn't real, because they need that lie to justify continuing with actions that the know are making global warming worse.

Capitalism is an economic mode of production. Capitalism has nothing to do with environmentalism. Do you think people would be more environmentally conscious if we were under communism? Do I have to remind you that the world’s greatest polluters are the Chinese Communists? What does a system where individual people have a freedom to spend money as they please have to do with the state of the environment, whose major polluters are illiberal states like China?

You just don’t know what capitalism is. As more people become environmentally concious, the markets will respond to that demand. See Tesla, for instance.

Capitalism is an economic mode of production under which a relative handful of individuals own the means of production and use them to accumulate wealth. As such, individuals who profit from environmentally damaging industries are incentivised to continue to damage the environment and to cover up the fact that they are damaging the environment.

---

You mean the People's Republic of China, where the industrialized nations of the western hemisphere have for decades outsourced most of their manufacturing?

What is the point here? Free trade between China and the West has greatly boosted net incomes in China and resulted in a market boom the likes of which has never been seen. If you are trying to suggest that Western countries are to blame for pollution in China, then you would be dead wrong, as China's greatest polluters are Chinese-government owned industries.

Well, yeah, quite literally. Even by their own admission. The government acknowledges that what they are doing right now is trying to have an industrialized capitalist society so that they can transition later on to socialism and, further down the line, communism.

This is false. The upper echelons of the Communist Party have realised, correctly, the communist and Marxian economics is utter hogwash and have since abandoned it in favour of state capitalism. State capitalism is not capitalism, however, as capitalism posits that the means of production should be owned by private individuals. Since the state is not a private individual, state-corporate ownership is not capitalism.

Nevertheless, China is still built on socialist and communist principles, and although they have abandoned much of Marxian economics, there is still strong state planning which oppresses economic and therefore social freedom.

It should probably tell you something about the efficacy of communism if every attempt to implement it has resulted in state capitalism.

"ACKSHUALLY the worse polluters are the Chinese communists capitalists"

Way to kick your own argument in the face, chief.

[The Emerald Legion]

Capitalism is an economic mode of production. Capitalism has nothing to do with environmentalism. Do you think people would be more environmentally conscious if we were under communism? Do I have to remind you that the world’s greatest polluters are the Chinese Communists? What does a system where individual people have a freedom to spend money as they please have to do with the state of the environment, whose major polluters are illiberal states like China?

You just don’t know what capitalism is. As more people become environmentally concious, the markets will respond to that demand. See Tesla, for instance.

Capitalism is an economic mode of production under which a relative handful of individuals own the means of production and use them to accumulate wealth. As such, individuals who profit from environmentally damaging industries are incentivised to continue to damage the environment and to cover up the fact that they are damaging the environment.

---

What is the point here? Free trade between China and the West has greatly boosted net incomes in China and resulted in a market boom the likes of which has never been seen. If you are trying to suggest that Western countries are to blame for pollution in China, then you would be dead wrong, as China's greatest polluters are Chinese-government owned industries.


This is false. The upper echelons of the Communist Party have realised, correctly, the communist and Marxian economics is utter hogwash and have since abandoned it in favour of state capitalism. State capitalism is not capitalism, however, as capitalism posits that the means of production should be owned by private individuals. Since the state is not a private individual, state-corporate ownership is not capitalism.

Nevertheless, China is still built on socialist and communist principles, and although they have abandoned much of Marxian economics, there is still strong state planning which oppresses economic and therefore social freedom.

It should probably tell you something about the efficacy of communism if every attempt to implement it has resulted in state capitalism.

"ACKSHUALLY the worse polluters are the Chinese communists capitalists"

Way to kick your own argument in the face, chief.

China isn't capitalist.

[The Black Forrest]

tfw the people who want equal rights for minorities and don't think that an insanely small fraction of the populace should hoard the vast majority of the world's wealth are the selfish ones

Minorities have equal rights and then some. And the latter should be translated "want to steal money from those who earned it."

Earned it? I went to school with wealth. Most of those people didn’t earn what they were given.

[Cordel One]

>EZLN

Literally irrelevant as far as the world stage goes.

ok and...?

[-Ra-]

I mean I meant to say morality but the right does respect mortality as well. The right recognise that we are all fickle human beings and everything is impertinent. Unlike the left, the right stressed duty and obligation to something that is greater than yourself, whereas leftism is fundamentally selfish.

tfw the people who want equal rights for minorities and don't think that an insanely small fraction of the populace should hoard the vast majority of the world's wealth are the selfish ones

The left doesn't want equal rights for minorities. This is just a front. The left just wants social control.

As for your last point, Churchill once said that the inherent vice of capitalism is that it distributes benefits unequally. The inherent virtue of socialism is that it distributes miseries equally. Equality matters for shit if everyone is equally poor off.

There are people in this world that realise that wealth inequality is inevitable and in some cases is good. Those people seek to improve the material conditions of all people in society and recognise that a rising tide lifts all boats. Then there are people who are selfish and feel entitled to money or property which is not theirs. These people should grow up.

[Loben III]

What is wrong with order?

In case you didn't notice, the guy said "mortality", as in death.

I’m pretty sure he meant morality.

[The Emerald Legion]

Minorities have equal rights and then some. And the latter should be translated "want to steal money from those who earned it."

Earned it? I went to school with wealth. Most of those people didn’t earn what they were given.

Of course they did.

[Des-Bal]

I would like to thank your irrepressible urge to "own" leftists for helping me prove my leftist point. It's very nice to have my argument accidentally validated by lazy insults.

I support your point. China isn't communist, you can tell because it exists. Communism doesn't work, it's advocacy is just a form of political masturbation. Much like regular masturbation I don't care if you do it but the fact that you're so comfortable about doing it in public rightly colors people's perception of you.

Blah blah blah "I get my views on Marxism from Facebook memes" blah blah blah

Honestly, how do American conservatives not implode from the sheer density of their embarrassing lack of understanding of the world?

I just love being an uneducated conservative. I'm skipping down the street despising tradition, religion, and any interference with a person's private life while slapping conservative bastions of censorship with my rolled up degree.

You assume people are one dimensional and uninformed because the thought that people who disagree with your ideas might be smarter than you is scary. You understand on some level that your beliefs are indefensible, it's why your approach to free speech is defined by fear.

[Liriena]

Oh, another thing, -Ra-: trying to "own" a leftist by invoking the works of Adam Smith is a bit like trying to own an astronomer by invoking Ptolemy. Everyone has read Adam Smith in high school or in their earliest college classes. Chances are, any Marxist you come across will know the works of Adam Smith and other early economists, and probably better than you at that. Because Marxists, generally speaking, aren't willfully ignorant. They don't just read Marx and Marx alone and call it a day.

[The Emerald Legion]

Oh, another thing, -Ra-: trying to "own" a leftist by invoking the works of Adam Smith is a bit like trying to own an astronomer by invoking Ptolemy. Everyone has read Adam Smith in high school or in their earliest college classes. Chances are, any Marxist you come across will now the works of Adam Smith and other early economists, and probably better than you at that. Because Marxists, generally speaking, aren't willfully ignorant. They don't just read Marx and Marx alone and call it a day.

Most Marxists probably haven't read anything and just wear a shirt and get told what it means by a classmate.

[Outer Acharet]

I broadly agree, though I do believe that certain aspects of hate speech imply lawless actions or criminal incitements to violence. Ultimately we have to decide where the line is drawn for ourselves. Legally you are correct that US federal law protects speech that does not constitute imminent incitements to criminal action under the First Amendment. I believe but may be wrong that certain states, particularly California, define hate speech as unprotected by calling it incitement to violence against a group. You're free to fact-check me on that.

Y'know what? Just ignore the legal aspect of my initial point and look at it this way:

Crowder was skirting the line of Youtube's policies regarding what the platform terms as hate speech.
Maza pressured Youtube to take action on their policies, using his position as a reporter to force Youtube's hand.
Rather than pick up bad press from the far left, Youtube chose to demonetize Crowder and take the bad press from the far right, as its perceptions were that the general public viewed them as less credible.

Everyone is scumbags in this situation. Crowder was an ass, Maza was domineering, and Youtube was, well, Youtube.

That is an incorrect assessment. It's not that federal law protects speech it's that the first amendment of the constitution does. States can protect MORE speech but they CANNOT protect less. I don't think california has a law against hate speech, it would be insane if they did because hate speech is explicitly protected speech. Any law that exists within california and is applied more restrictively than the Brandenburg decision would allow is constitutionally invalid.

Crowder was an ass who wanted to talk including to talk to Maza , Maza was an ass who wanted people silenced, youtube made it's policy decisions based on which way the wind was blowing. Everybody's scumbags but crowder is the lesser of three evils.

Several states have anti-"ethnic intimidation" laws. However, I believe I may have been overextending the law a bit in my analysis. The most strict of these don't seem to cover what Crowder did, and I don't think it should. He didn't burn a cross or anything. He insulted Maza, who then got mad and threatened YT to punish Crowder for it.

So, if I may revise my above statement slightly, I think Crowder was an ass. I still keep my point that certain aspects of hate speech constitute criminal incitements to violence against a group.

Crowder, however, was not committing a criminal act, and his speech does not qualify as that sort of speech that would legally be called hate speech.

For a quick summary, if you're interested, I was using this wikipedia page. There are certain instances in several states in the US where hate speech is not protected. These are broadly called "Intimidating Speech Exceptions".

[Nuroblav]

Oh, another thing, -Ra-: trying to "own" a leftist by invoking the works of Adam Smith is a bit like trying to own an astronomer by invoking Ptolemy. Everyone has read Adam Smith in high school or in their earliest college classes. Chances are, any Marxist you come across will know the works of Adam Smith and other early economists, and probably better than you at that. Because Marxists, generally speaking, aren't willfully ignorant. They don't just read Marx and Marx alone and call it a day.

Also this 'oThEr sIdE bAd' crap is just getting annoying now.

[Liriena]

Capitalism is an economic mode of production under which a relative handful of individuals own the means of production and use them to accumulate wealth. As such, individuals who profit from environmentally damaging industries are incentivised to continue to damage the environment and to cover up the fact that they are damaging the environment.

---

"ACKSHUALLY the worse polluters are the Chinese communists capitalists"

Way to kick your own argument in the face, chief.

China isn't capitalist.

Then why do you get most of your consumer products manufactured there? Seems like a serious conflict of interest for western capitalism to rely so heavily on a rival economic system to supply for its own people's demands.

[-Ra-]

Capitalism is an economic mode of production under which a relative handful of individuals own the means of production and use them to accumulate wealth. As such, individuals who profit from environmentally damaging industries are incentivised to continue to damage the environment and to cover up the fact that they are damaging the environment.

That is not what capitalism is and you do not understand what capitalism means. Capitalism is, and I quote, "an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state." Capitalism says nothing about a "relative handful of individuals" or whatever nonsense the left cooks up. The florist down the street is as much a capitalist as the Fortune 500 CEO.

Your premise is incorrect as well. As people become more aware of environmental harm and resources like oil begin to grow scarce, businesses will adapt to cater to more environmentally-conscious markets. They are only incentivised if it is profitable, and environmental exploitation isn't necessarily profitable.

"ACKSHUALLY the worse polluters are the Chinese communists capitalists"

Way to kick your own argument in the face, chief.

Actually the worse polluters are the Chinese Communists.

[-Ra-]

China isn't capitalist.

Then why do you get most of your consumer products manufactured there? Seems like a serious conflict of interest for western capitalism to rely so heavily on a rival economic system to supply for its own people's demands.

China is more reliant on the US than the US ever is on China lol.

[Cordel One]

tfw the people who want equal rights for minorities and don't think that an insanely small fraction of the populace should hoard the vast majority of the world's wealth are the selfish ones

The left doesn't want equal rights for minorities. This is just a front. The left just wants social control.

As for your last point, Churchill once said that the inherent vice of capitalism is that it distributes benefits unequally. The inherent virtue of socialism is that it distributes miseries equally. Equality matters for shit if everyone is equally poor off.

There are people in this world that realise that wealth inequality is inevitable and in some cases is good. Those people seek to improve the material conditions of all people in society and recognise that a rising tide lifts all boats. Then there are people who are selfish and feel entitled to money or property which is not theirs. These people should grow up.

Social control was never the plan. Our real plan is to mass-convert all males into femboys using the wealth hoarded by billionaires.

Seriously though Churchill was an imperialist who let millions starve in India and Ireland among other places.

[Outer Acharet]

Capitalism is an economic mode of production under which a relative handful of individuals own the means of production and use them to accumulate wealth. As such, individuals who profit from environmentally damaging industries are incentivised to continue to damage the environment and to cover up the fact that they are damaging the environment.

---

"ACKSHUALLY the worse polluters are the Chinese communists capitalists"

Way to kick your own argument in the face, chief.

China isn't capitalist.

China's government is very capitalist. They may restrict goods flow within their own borders, but in their dealings with foreign powers they are perfectly happy to allow state-owned companies to go out and trade freely, all within Beijing's guiding hand, of course.

[Loben III]

Oh, another thing, -Ra-: trying to "own" a leftist by invoking the works of Adam Smith is a bit like trying to own an astronomer by invoking Ptolemy. Everyone has read Adam Smith in high school or in their earliest college classes. Chances are, any Marxist you come across will now the works of Adam Smith and other early economists, and probably better than you at that. Because Marxists, generally speaking, aren't willfully ignorant. They don't just read Marx and Marx alone and call it a day.

Most Marxists probably haven't read anything and just wear a shirt and get told what it means by a classmate.

Maybe they were told “free shit.”

That tends to get people on board

[Necroghastia]

tfw the people who want equal rights for minorities and don't think that an insanely small fraction of the populace should hoard the vast majority of the world's wealth are the selfish ones

Minorities have equal rights and then some.

Disabled people aren't allowed to have more than 2000 dollars, and that includes money that their spouse has. If you have a preexisting condition and no insurance, good luck finding any. Trans people are constantly facing attacks on their rights to legally ID according to their gender. If you bothered to pay attention and not live in denial, you would have noticed an enormity of police violence against minorities in recent years. And that's just in America.

And the latter should be translated "want to steal money from those who earned it."

What does a CEO do that "earns" an order of magnitude more money than the people who are the boots on the ground?