|
Last thread got gassed, so I'll make a new one. Let's try to keep a cool head about posts, a disclaimer that applies to me as well really. I'm still allowing people to come in and defend Youtube intellectuals without fear of anything but the usual verbal backlash. I gotta get my kicks somehow. PROTIP: Watch intellectuals in Private/Incognito mode so Youtube doesn't adjust its video selection to shove more of these fuckers into our face! Anyway! The gently caress is all this? Youtube Intellectuals are what I call people who create videos trying to argue against (or as they say "loving DESTROY") progressive concepts. A typical video from one of these gentlemen (and they are almost exclusively male) usually consists of a voiceover as the main draw, where they basically just talk for thirty minutes to an hour about how feminism/trans people/star wars/whatever is killing our society. These people do minimal amounts of work and they usually use shallow arguments to try and disprove whatever is stuck in their craw that day. They cover for this with a veneer of intellectualism even though few of them have any expertise with any field, let alone anything like economics or sociology. So why do we care? Because there are hundreds of these fuckers and they get paid to do this. A combination of Patreon money and Youtube ad revenue can allow the most famous of them to basically subsist off just talking to the internet for 30 minute periods. They also typically have have shittons of subscribers and the most popular of their lot get millions of views per video. Whether we like to admit it or not, they do have a lot of influence and their opinions spread very far. Coupled with the way Youtube recommends the most popular videos to website newcomers, this becomes a sort of self-feeding Oroborous where pseudo-intellectualism prospers. Let's list some of these charmers Thunderf00t  Youtube link: https://www.youtube.com/user/Thunderf00t An atheist blogger who originally made a famous series of videos called "Why People Mocked Creationism". It was a series of about 40 videos, each one dedicated to taking a creationist talking point, and then showing why it's bullshit. The series was very well-liked and remains the thing Thunderf00t is most famous for. Unfortunately the fame kind of went into his head and he leaped into a lot of public debates where he did really, really badly. Thunderf00t was at one point invited to a sort of blog group of other famous atheists. At the time, there was apparently a debate on sexual harassment and feminism, and Thunderf00t decided to hop in. It went about as well as you expect, he became increasingly unhinged and increasingly convinced that there was some sort of feminist cabal out to destroy mankind in general and him in particular. The group basically kicked him out shortly after. At a certain point, he became one of the patriarchs of the Gamergate movement, whether he wants to admit it or not. His videos on criticism of third wave feminism became increasingly unhinged as he gained more traction among the dipshit circles. This culminated in an obsession with Anita Sarkeesian, a woman who he tries to tear down any chance he gets. At this point, that's pretty much all he is known for, crusading against some feminist cabal, and trying to rip apart Sarkeesian talking points. He also makes a point of mocking rape survivors because something something professional victim. Sargon of Akkad  Youtube link: https://www.youtube.com/user/SargonofAkkad100 Oh boy where do I start with this one Sargon of Akkad is a complicated figure. What he says is not representative of what he is. He claims to be a liberal, but his views are strictly libertarian/conservative. Like, to the degree that the EDL and The Daily Stormer have endorsed him. SoA claims he's a rational, who simply wants objective facts in fields like feminism, but in reality he's more interested in winning Twitter wars while using any pedantic criticism to tear down scientific articles which go against his points. He has an enormous hate boner for feminists and the "regressive left" (essentially a dogwhistle for people who think not saying the n word in public is a good thing). He believes feminists are responsible for victimizing men and for propagating the "myth" of rape culture. He believes that post-secondary education is overrun with progressives who destroyed the validity of their own movement and want to return this country to a state of...uhhh...some...place where you can't uh...say anything bad, I guess?? SoA is a suspected graduate of the school of Wikipedia, hence why his YouTube avatar is the mask of the grandson of Sargon of Akkad and not of Sargon himself. A lot of his talking points and world views are cobbled together from hastily read wikipedia articles, which has tripped him up in the past. He is a Bernie voter voting for Trump, which really tells you all you need to know. He has also debated Kristi Winters, a woman with an Actual PhD, and she absolutely destroyed him, to the degree that not even his supporters were willing to lick his wounds: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTfCkp0Juao Here is the discussion she had after the debate, which I recommend listening to because Kristi is an interesting woman and has really sharp analytical skills: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4OyVcdn0s7g#t=3245s Armored Skeptic  Despite the annoying gimmick (he uses that avatar of the dude with the knight helmet and changes its expressions as he gives his talking points), AS does genuinely have some legitimate critique on religious fundamentalism and conspiracy theories. He used to be part of jewish sect, but became an atheist after reading atheist works. He has been endorsed by famous atheists such as Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris. He spends his time trying to point out the fallacies of religious people as well as tearing down conspiracy theories. Unfortunately if you guessed one of those conspiracy theories to be third-wave feminsim, you're right. Like SoA he believes rape culture to be a myth and that women are in no way disadvantaged when they go into STEM fields. A lot of AS's issues stem from his honetly somewhat solepsistic world view; if I don't see it as an issue to me, I don't see why it is an issue to you. He also would much rather launch into :nattyice: burns and snarky statements rather than use actual citations to back his arguments. He's dating another Youtube named Shoe0nHead, who is a sort of antifemnist MRA I guess? They do collaboration videos together. This can only end well. The Amazing Atheist  Like AS and thunderf00t, tAA made his mark by dedicating videos to refuting creationism and popular political beliefs. If Thunderf00t was well liked before he went off the deep end, I can't ever say that tAA had the same sort of support. If you could imagine Bill Maher as a shithead teenage, militant atheist, libertarian with no filter, you'd have tAA. He went far and beyond simple religious critique, usually also adding a healthy amount of insults and threats. All in all, he was essentially a grognard with a YouTube channel until feminism reared its head. And that was when he showed his true colours. tAA hates feminism (and women in general if I'm being quite honest) with a passion. Like the others Youtube Rationals™, he believes feminists are some sort of evil cabal, trying to enforce female supremacy. He believes that rape culture is a myth and that if the problem hasn't bothered him or his friends, then obviously it's not a problem worth discussing. He's also frequently targeted rape surivors with insults. Because...uhhhh...that's the kind of guy he is, I guess. He is in favor of lesser punishments for pedophiles and child molesters, saying that the age of consent really should be a thing of the past. He later recanted these statements, saying that he only made them when he was an edgy 20 year old. uh, yeah. Really any time the conversation starts where tAA and sex are mentioned, you should prob leave the room or wear protective eye-wear cause the results won't be pretty. Chris Ray Gun  A popular newcomer on the block, CRG has become a darling among the Intellectuals for...honestly I don't know why. People seem to like his editing and voice, but frankly to me he always came off as a whiny brat. His videos are almost completely dedicated towards Im_a_white_guy.avi and as such, his fans love him for it. He regularly encourages people to "drink bleach!" which has been something of a victory cry among his fanbase. lol funny memes amirite. I sort of have very little to write about because mostly he's just loving boring. He just does that bullshit argument technique where he yells that people make no sense and need to grow up while playing with zooms in editing. If you want a white guy metaphorically jacking off onto your face for 30 mins, boy does he have something for you. He hasn't done anything egregiously wrong, like Sargon or AA, but the usual suspects support him and the daily stormer cited one of his videos so watch this space! Questions Holy gently caress these people are dumb they are in fact so dumb I am gonna- Please don't touch the poop in any way. No comments, no PMs. Safari rules. Derails? Due to the broad spectrum of subjects covered by these people I expect this thread to veer off-topic. This is fine, though I appreciate it if people didn't spend like 10 pages discussing how WSJ wasn't 100% fair to PewDiePie. Also I'd really appreciate it if we didn't have slapfights over consent and rape statistics since that never ends well and that's a common bugbear for Youtube Intellectuals. I mean you know he's not wro- Be prepared to defend any opinion like this. I will ask thread regulars to explain to people calmly why they're wrong, this isn't the feminism thread where you can tell people to educate themselves, please try. OTOH, if you're being intellectually dishonest or particularly dense or crazy I will allow posters in the thread to mock your opinions mercilessly. Asking what would satisfy feminist critique is a legitimate question that deserves a legitimate answer. Asking why feminists are creating a victim culture deserves pointing and laughing. Use your good judgement. Though both sorts are welcome here!  Why do people care so much about Star Wars? cuz theyre a bunch of fuken nerds Seraphic Neoman fucked around with this message at 10:50 on Apr 27, 2017 |
#
¿
Apr 19, 2017 20:41
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 23:54 |
|
|
I'll post stuff about Davis Aurini, Matt Ray Gun and a few others as well. I might do Warcorpse because oh my god Last thread we were having an actually interesting discussion about Youtube revenue versus Patreon revenue and how company policies on commercials affected the Intellectuals' income. Let's keep going with that.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2017 20:43
|
|
|
drat bily right out of the gate with the  BillyBlanks posted:So this is the opposite of the last thread? No. I was annoyed with people dismissing genuine questions from people who simply didn't engage with the material as much as they did. This will encourage a few of the thread regulars to reconsider their own points and try to get them to post better. You are not one of the people I am concerned about so that doesn't apply to you
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2017 21:29
|
|
|
Added Matt Ray Gun to the OP. If anyone wants to add more stuff about him, post it and I will.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2017 02:15
|
|
|
Somfin posted:He answered your challenge. Do you have the stones to do the same? Memory serves the rules say it's a ban if he doesn't.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 23, 2017 07:12
|
|
|
mojo1701a posted:I'm not sure what the rules are. I just posted the picture to show that dog, even though I found out after that the rule has since been rescinded (figured better safe than sorry since that was my first probation ever). Dog rule is not in effect anymore, but that photo rule was a thing enforced in GBS and E/N. It was a sort of Toxx clause; if you asked for a photo of someone then you had to post your own as well or eat a ban. Helped curb shitposts.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2017 01:34
|
|
|
ManlyGrunting posted:Anyway back on track I found this fellowhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KdFzMLZAXEM I'm really loving tired of the whole "GLOBALIST ELITE" bullshit. Dumb motherfuckers don't even know what globalism is.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2017 23:14
|
|
|
uuurgh oh my god you guys stop it ManlyGrunting posted:Would you mind giving me a comprehensive definition then? I have a sort of vague idea that I think is correct (ie it doesn't hinge on a single ethnic group pulling the strings) but I could always use a sharper understanding. It's totally not what you're thinking. Globalism is a school of thought for any policies, theories or what have you that have to do with globalization. International trade, global communication, immigration, international coalition/organization and so on. It's a very broad term but essentially it means "poo poo that involves all major countries in the world, usually for peaceful purposes". That's it. There is nothing sinister about it. Because the term is so broad, people usually discuss one of its child terms, like free trade, neoliberalism (yes, neoliberalism is a part of globalism), International debt, etc. So the next time someone tells you that Americans hate globalism, I want you to make the best shocked expression you can possibly make and ask "really?? Since when? The US prints the global currency. US prospers from trade. America's debt is bought by other countries, who have a great deal of trust in America's status as an economic power. We love globalism when did we start to hate it??" They will then pull a shocked expression and go real quiet. So what the gently caress is going on with the term nowadays?  okay. here is where it gets stupid.You know how Neo-Nazis believe that the Zionist Occupied Government or the Jews or whatever controls the world from behind the scenes? Well people started to get laughed out of rooms whenever they used those terms, so instead they started to use code. They were the global cabal of bankers therefore they are the globalists. This is a meaningless word that has nothing to do with what globalism actually means. But, it worked. Right wingers enjoy isolationist policies, and those are the opposite of what globalism is about (not 100% true but close enough for all but the most pedantic macroeconomist  ). So they not only had a handy coded slur, but they could use it as a political weapon against liberal policies. "Oh you want free trade? Looks like you support the globalists!" it's now become a very easy, brainless tool conservatives use to shutdown discussion. It has all the traits of being an intellectual term, but it's really just a meaningless insult.At the end of the day, they are really just misusing a very broad term which America largely prospered from. Seraphic Neoman fucked around with this message at 10:13 on Apr 26, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2017 09:55
|
|
|
Freakazoid_ posted:the science guy is not a cuck but his pussy game is weak, he pretty much admits it. Bill Nye is the biggest pimp in america he just doesn't get high of his own supply
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2017 04:21
|
|
|
Midig posted:OP, why did the old thread get gassed (specifically) and how are we going to prevent this one from dying? Don't worry about it. Everyone just needs to post with a bit more effort, and be less derail-y. I don't mind tangents, those are inevitable, but let's just have a cool head about subjects. Unless it's an Intellectual whiteknight in which case all bets are off, go nuts.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2017 10:57
|
|
|
 lol jokes huh
|
|
#
¿
May 3, 2017 00:05
|
|
|
Pittsburgh Lambic posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=faefeilGwrQ They called the snake "Jared"
|
|
#
¿
May 7, 2017 03:35
|
|
|
Kristi said that she had to practice for the debate, getting her points in a row, making sure she had enough time and everything. Honestly, you could probably debate a PhD if you had like 2-3 weeks of prep. You probably won't win, but you'll have a better showing than Carl.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2017 21:16
|
|
|
Holy poo poo is there a link? I didn't know there was a manifesto! I NEED that poo poo Also anyone know what the gently caress is up with that Modern Educayshun short film?
|
|
#
¿
May 13, 2017 20:44
|
|
|
Who What Now posted:Gamers are people that substitute videogames for a personality. If you live a well-adjusted, balanced life you are not a True GamerTM It's perfectly fine to identify yourself by a hobby you like. It's not fine doing it in excess. Plenty of people are gamers with a well-adjusted lifestyle and the whole "gamers are dead" thing was a really stupid phrase. also alt+0153 my bro.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2017 21:41
|
|
|
I also want to crosspost this amazing post about Sargon's petition. It's from reddit, but the dude deserved his gold:quote:Internet ideologues and their sycophants will never get a "conversation" with academics. Confronted with their nonsense, the only thing an academic can do is point out how they are wrong, and stop talking with them when it becomes evident that they have no intention of listening. A debate presupposes two at least remotely similarly sophisticated and defensible positions. There can be no debate between a geologist and the guy asserting igneous rocks are bullshit. The latter can listen and learn, or they can stop wasting our time, but it's absurd to even contemplate that there can be a legitimate "debate" between us. Your views are not tennable and even if we reconstruct them in order to make them tennable (that is, if we do your work) they will remain fairly unnuanced. That's just all there is to this. No amount of shouting and stomping your feet down will make us take you seriously because you are simply incapable of advancing any argument worth taking seriously, and that's fully and exhaustively on you, on your intellectual laziness. You could read a book, but you choose not to. You could ask for recommendations in any of the academic subreddits, you could ask for help understanding the material, there, too. But you choose not to. That's all well and good, but you can not, in turn, expect us to think highly of you. and from the same thread quote:
|
|
#
¿
Jul 10, 2017 21:46
|
|
|
I don't get why people try to play peacekeeper, especially in threads like this one. This would be like if Pittsburgh tried to defend freepers in the Freep Mock Thread. That's not even going into the point that we're well past the point where compromise in beliefs is an acceptable alternative in modern day society.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2017 02:08
|
|
|
it shaun posted:Asking people like Lauren to openly state their opinion on Jewish conspiracies is a fun one. What's she doing now anyway? Didn't she get canned for being in support of abortion by the powers that be?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2017 02:36
|
|
|
There's also people who criticize the TERFs for being essentially being a trojan horse for anti-feminism, since they use patriarchal ideas in order to back-up their beliefs.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2017 04:35
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:I honestly find it fascinating that this guy has any following at all. It's not just that his political ideas are terrible, but he's also just genuinely really stupid. Like, in a "does not perform well with cognitive tasks" sense. All his points are the sort of thing a random 16 year old might come up with, but a bunch of people take him seriously because of his accent. It goes back to that reddit post I quoted; the guy's not even wrong. He doesn't do the legwork to even get to the point where he can be wrong. Sargon isn't interested in critiquing feminism, he's interested in fighting for whatever side can carpet over any nasty political issues that inconvenience white males. He's a subscriber to the "if I can't see it, it doesn't exist" philosophy of politics. Also in the unlikely event anyone is actually listening to Iambic, please remember 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2017 07:15
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sUD1RvFWzeE Here is another "debate" he did with Michael Brooks of Majority.FM. He keeps working up to a point, but it's a point that he has built over faulty ideas he extracted from the prevailing sentiments in society. I'll admit that Brooks sorta flexed his mic muscles quite a bit, but uh...I don't really care because gently caress Sargon he was going nowhere fast anyway. So I can't really see this guy being any sort of voice for a critique of leftism, academia or what have you. He is honestly just incompetent in every aspect of his philosophy tbh
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2017 07:26
|
|
|
Midig posted:By the feminist/SJW (for a lack of a better term) definition of racism as prejudice + power, is that a specific kind of power (like say political power) or all types of power? Genuinely curious.  Anthropological definition actually!But to answer your question, people tend to use it as a catch-all term which describes the type of power based on the context of the discussion. I think (or at least this has been my experience) academics usually prefer to use a more specific phrase to discuss an issue, so for instance an economist would probably not use the word racism to talk about economic issues among minorities, they would instead us "economic inequality". But, when it comes time to talk about the source of these sorts of issues, academics readily identify racism/racial prejudice/whathaveyou as the underlying reason they came to be. The same economist would probably talk about history of economic inequality, and racism would certainly be fingered as one of the reasons it's present in society. So in short: among laypeople it's used as a shot-hand for all sorts of power. Among academic writing (again, from my experience) it's usually used as "prejudice based on race and nationality which has led to numerous problems in society"
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2017 23:20
|
|
|
Terrible Opinions posted:Fine here's an easy one. Watch Sargon correctly ID that African American crime is primarily motivated by poverty, and then turn around to blame that poverty on "matriarchal households" and "gang culture". This very conclusion is racist. Thus Sargon is racist. He comes this close to realizing that institutional racism exists, but his own racism makes him unable to understand. This conclusion is a loving fossil. It's from the Moynihan Report which is basically discredited by every reputable academic, and is used as a case study of what victim-blaming racism looks like. RottenK posted:So how does it feels to be so stupid that a fan of Carl of Swindon manages to repeatedly bait you, over and over agan? My rules state that people can engage with them if they find it fun. But fair enough, I do sorta have to ask if you guys are having fun? Unlike Billy, PI is sorta boring. Seraphic Neoman fucked around with this message at 23:54 on Jul 16, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2017 23:50
|
|
|
Does anyone want to discuss the Moynihan Report or shall we move on? I don't really give enough of a poo poo to pony up evidence for Pitts, but the report's conclusions are very firmly ingrained in the psyche of conservatives and I'm certain more than one intellectual on Youtube (other than Sargon) brought them up. Less because they know what the report is, and more because they read its conclusions in a chain e-mail. So, I guess really my question is "Does anyone other than PL give a poo poo?"
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2017 23:58
|
|
|
Aramis posted:Isn't this thread about piling up on internet "smart people" who use lame straw mans and pedantry as a means to "win" arguments in the first place? It started off as a derail, but I think this is turning kinda beautifully self-sustaining at this point. So as someone who normally just lurks around, I don't really mind. The Youtube Intellectualism is coming from...inside here!?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 17, 2017 04:59
|
|
|
Y'all fuckers don't need to jump on every poster. Though LFM could stand to be less glib in his original post, y'all didn't need to jump in on the special needs thing. Chill. Direct your anger at dumb youtube men (and I suppose women now )Lightning Lord posted:From what I understand, IQ tests are only useful when they're part of the spectrum of educational tools, not when used as the sole determining factor of intelligence like Molyneux wants, and when low scores are seen as a failing of the education system and something to be improved rather than ammunition against a particular group of people. This. What is the standard measure for IQ? Well usually it's pattern identification, knowledge of grammar and vocabulary and so on. How do you test that? How do you know your tests are accurate? If a person sucks in math, but can deconstruct the messages of James Joyce does that mean they have low/average IQ? The entire test is usually used as a sort of "this is the ballpark of how smart people are, sorta". It's honestly barely even useful there because the "average IQ" needs to constantly be re-adjusted as information becomes more easily available to people thanks to the internet and improvements to the education system.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 18, 2017 03:02
|
|
|
Extreme0 posted:You stated SA would ban people for going over the line with jokes despite the many threads (for example the Photoshop threads) pretty much doing that without punishment. The case isn't so much that the joke is offensive (There have been offensive jokes in the past be unpunished because it's actually funny) but rather if it's just poo poo laughable joke that really dosen't offer anything to the discussion and only makes the user posting it an idiot. I actually agree with this, but as others have noted in this case it's also PewDiePie being a shithead.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2017 08:55
|
|
|
Monglo posted:And about Sam Harris, why is it insufficient explanation for you that what he said was in fact a part of a thought experiment? Why ascribe an insidious motive to his musings? I'll just quote Rational Wiki cause it explains it far better than any of us could quote:Just asking questions (JAQ-ing off) is a way of attempting to make wild accusations acceptable (and hopefully not legally actionable) by framing them as questions rather than statements. It shifts the burden of proof to one's opponent — rather than laboriously having to prove that all politicians are reptoid scum, one can pull out one single odd piece of evidence and force the opponent to explain why the evidence is wrong. Framing his hate as trying to have an intellectual discussion is the reason people hate Harris. It's the same sort of musings that resulted in this emoji:  To say he is unaware of this is dishonest because 1) You cannot make a criticism for Muslims without inevitably mentioning the War on Terror and then I have a hard time thinking how people can then go "hmmm maybe torture is good??" and 2) He diminishes other countries' roles in shaping the Middle East political landscape, while arguing that violence is just a part of their culture and c'est la vie. It's a point of view that is reductive and juvenile.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2017 01:23
|
|
|
1. The Ticking Bomb scenario never happens. Ever. At all. It's a hollywood fantasy. Every person who was ever involved in counterterrorism will tell you so. Just ask former FBI interrogator Jack Cloonan, a dude who helped locate Bin Laden: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OGdNhwFqhyU 2. For a man who dismissed emotional and moral arguments against torture, he is awfully willing to apply them to justify torture in his time bomb scenario 3. "Opponents of torture will be quick to argue that confessions elicited by torture are notoriously unreliable. Given the foregoing, however, this objection seems to lack its usual force. Make these confessions as unreliable as you like—the chance that our interests will be advanced in any instance of torture need only equal the chance of such occasioned by the dropping of a single bomb. " is loving stupid and literally the opposite of reality. Harris is dismissing the single strongest point against torture: it doesn't work. We tried it time and time again and we got useless information that did not help US interests. Under pain (not the threat of pain, mind) people will say anything for the torture to stop. And rarely is it true. 4. Harris is equating killing soldiers on the battlefield with torturing POWs. I trust I don't have to explain the massive divide between two enemy combatants and a torture/victim scenario. Harris does not even set up his scenario honestly. 5. Harris assumes all radicals are 100% devoted to their cause. This is patently untrue as Jack Cloonan can once again confirm: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCXnZUu3o1E Even the much-feared Bin Laden was a hypocrite. He lived in a fortified stronghold, not in a cave. And despite expecting celibacy from his followers, he lived with multiple wives and had absolute shittons of porn. People are people, and Harris is constantly trying to convince us they are not. 6. Harris is ignoring what precedent torture set for US foreign policy and how we are viewed by the rest of the world. 7. The reputation of the above is used by radicals to radicalize regular people and gain more membership, making their numbers grow. Harris' approach will just lead to more terrorism. You think they are afraid of the US's bluster? ISIL literally uses Trump's speeches in their ads to convince people to not escape to other countries. Seraphic Neoman fucked around with this message at 02:11 on Jul 20, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2017 02:09
|
|
|
^^actually read that dude's post insteadMonglo posted:EDIT: SSNeoman,I understood it that he specifically equates torture of POW to the inevitable collateral damage of hundreds and thousands of innocent civilians which is inevitable in modern warfare. Would you not agree that torturing a single POW is ethical if it spares the civilians? It's a hypothetical scenario, I admit, but does that Rob the question of its merits? Given how ineffective torture is, and what its outcomes are, no. I would not agree. So yes, the question is extremely ignorant and without merit. Like dude this isn't even "well in a vacuum..." this is "no this doesn't work ever ever ever don't do this."
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2017 02:34
|
|
|
Spread your wings and fly
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2017 02:55
|
|
|
I can't help but admire shaun's fortitude in sitting through a TL;DR video. I only last a minute before wanting to find him and swirly his dumb nerd rear end.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 1, 2017 18:03
|
|
|
https://psmag.com/news/on-the-milo-bus-with-the-lost-boys-of-americas-new-right#.x7pin3kltquote:The vehemence of the protests and the headline-baiting images of masked men setting fires and breaking glass represent a small win for Yiannopoulos: He gets to go on Fox News and play the victim. The rest of the crew are purely freaked out. One of the younger hangers-on has an anxiety disorder and had to fight down a panic attack that could have held up the swift retreat. Whatever anyone claims, it’s hard to shake off being run out of town by 3,000 people screaming that you’re a Nazi. It’s the sort of thing that gives everyone but the coldest sociopath at least a little pause, and most of this crew don’t have the gumption or street smarts to function outside of a Reddit forum. They’re not the flint-eyed skinheads that many anti-fascists are used to fighting. I’m not a brawler, but I’d wager that these kids could be knocked down with a well-aimed stack of explanatory pamphlets, thus resolving decades of debate about whether it’s better to punch or to reason with racists. You overestimate the modern white supremacist movement. They would love to keep this as an ideological battle, cause those ones they can control and win. poo poo like antifa and actual driven protest, especially ones that turn violent, isn't something they are prepared for. When socially declawed, the modern Nazis are a bunch of bitches. So we need to socially declaw them. Not quite the alt-right, but this was demonstrable during the Malheur Bird Sancruary Occupation. Remember how they were all expecting the True Patriots to ride in an parachute down, but then suddenly all their supporters had bad knees and other health problems? This will be the same thing here.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2017 17:06
|
|
|
Fados posted:It's funny that many in the thread treat the recent surge in exposure of ethno-centric movements as a kind of contingent alien invasion which can be erased by simply silencing them. In Europe there's been literal neo-nazi/fascist movements like the Golden Dawn or the Front National for decades. The US also had a much bigger surge than the alt-right in recent times, that I see as a lot more scary because of the influence it in the mainstream of politics, as a libertarian/christian fundamentalist vein, in the Tea Party. Galaxy_brain.jpeg
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2017 18:04
|
|
|
I'm gonna let this go on for a bit longer but I'd prefer it if we go back to making fun of dumb Youtube people and not letting concern trolls derail this thread. If anyone here is worried about punching Nazis then 1) Please watch Contra's video on the matter 2) Make a separate thread and 3) Stop being so mad that people are making fun of Youtube Intellectuals in the Youtube Intellectual Mock thread you loving morons
|
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2017 05:09
|
|
|
drat too long for a thread title.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2017 21:44
|
|
|
I'm glad you guys are finally getting into the spirit of things. I bet Sargin never vidchats with the camgirls lest some degenerate money-grabbing harpy recognize him and then destroys his reputation as is her cultural marxist imperative.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 11, 2017 20:50
|
|
|
I loving hate Tucker Carlson and I hope he gets swirlied by his co-workers. Or Lauren Duca.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2017 04:12
|
|
|
bobjr posted:I always thought that most of the big people weren't really into vidoe games at all, they just saw an opportunity and took it. Didn't Milo have some thing where he showed he knew basically nothing about video games? He actually used to poo poo on people who played video games, calling them no-life virgins.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2017 18:44
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 23:54 |
|
|
If it is a legit tweet I'm adding it to the OP.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2017 23:14
|
|