A concerning pattern in ALL Socialist childhoods 

Or we could award custody by default to fathers with very rare exceptions.

​@Neuromancerism which would only result in more abused and or abandoned children.

@@suebotchie4167 How? We have the evidence. Single mothers are terrible for children while single fathers are as good, in some aspects possibly even slightly better than couples. Thats what the data shows.

@@suebotchie4167 Meanwhile, virtually all single mothers are deadbeats demanding others pay for their choice to be single mothers.

@@suebotchie4167 NO it would NOT!!! ALL 6 of my siblings were raised by my father...after our mother LEFT!! HE was the better parent....women lie...God said so in His Word from the very beginning!! And ALL 6 of us have had successful lives with successful families and children and grandchildren....BECAUSE of our great upbringing by our father!! NOT much from our self-absorbed mother.

Hurt people hurts people

One of my favorite House MD episodes "all parents screw up all children". Some do in such small ways the kids are able to get through life well enough, others are really destructive, a long and complicated scale.

Then the worst times are ahead of us.

The more I look around, the more I just see a lot of broken people breaking other people. I glad to see by yours and Huang's comment I'm not the only one. Our desire to bend over backwards to "rehabilitate" criminals and give them repeated chances comes at the cost of enabling them to create exponentially more victims, many of which go on to become likewise perpetrators.

Karl Marx's family actually seemed pretty good.

What do you mean by socialism? Socialism is basically just resistance to the global Anglo empire… now Moscow has a better living standard than London

@@701delbronx8 Yeah, Moscow is a poster of Russia. Look what other Russian cities are like.

@@701delbronx8 socialism does not mean anti anglo or anti anglo imperialism have you even read a book before?!

​@@701delbronx8No... just no.

@@701delbronx8 Moscow or Russia aren't even socialist anymore and are doing good because they abandoned it lmao

Not just people who never worked - people who resented work and resented people who DO work.

The labour party ,,,full of academics ,

And they act like capitalism is the one full of contradictions 😂 There’s no better phrase to apply to marx than “allergic to work” it was clearly everyone else’s fault he was perpetually broke regardless of having never got a job and no matter how much free money he got from everyone around him

Exactly.

​@@RashaMattBlais.. so pretty much like our current govt then. How /do/ people come to resent those who work ? How did they think all their comforts got made ?

Not sure that's correct. You may just be noticing the bad examples more because they can become very destructive, and negative things grab our attention fiercely.

@@RafaelDolfe-qm6ll you do have a point that bad examples tend to stick out more. Many of my close friends did have, as far as I can make out, happy childhoods with good parents but…the majority of bad parenting victims were people I got to know intimately through having relationships with. In most cases this is when very dark places get to be shown.

i know when i was a young fellow back in the late '80's early '90's there were lots of girls that wanted a welfare baby. It was a career choice

Most people in general are naive when it comes to bad parenting. In fact most people will just write off as “oh they are doing their best”. Or oh “it’s for your own good”. No, absolutely not, bad parents deserve to be called out and told they are bad parents. Other wise we are all condoning the abuse of children.

@@cristianluna5568 Haven't you heard, it's not abuse, it's "character building experiences", and when those fail I guess the child was just born rotten, the parents did nothing wrong and were loving in their own way! It's all a big Cluster B circus of drama and people keep getting sucked into it even if they aren't disordered themselves.

He was a parasite to society like all of them. They couldn't care less about the workers or the paysanery.

"worthless POS" is the most apt description of Marx yet. TY

Yes I'm sitting here wondering exactly how an essay from someone so worthless and with no credentials, experience, or anything to show from his life at all became so popular and held in such high academic regard

@@ashleycnossen3157it appeals to people who have a high opinion of their own intellect but don’t feel they can “compete” or produce or don’t feel they should HAVE to compete or produce due to their intellect.

​@debblouin So it appeals to people just like him, huh evil begets evil then doesn't it.

I had visions of them getting on famously, watching westerns together and plotting the demise of the russian people...

Say what you will about Stalin and Hitler, But you can’t accuse them of being lazy.

Unfortunately lol xD

Lenin, Stalin, and Hitler were, by any definition, extremely active workaholics to the point of damaging their own health. They had virtually no private lives and lived for their work. It just happened to be politics or academic study. This video's thesis is pretty stupid.

stalin was a bank robber.

very true

The line is 'love thy neighbour as thyself'.

The other matter is that there's an element of putting God first too. Altruism has a flaw in that there's a selfishness in seeing the result. Putting God first yields no earthly result that we can prove. Altruism won't lead to humility the way true Christianity does.

​​@@damian_cross This is an issue among alot of Protestants, Alot of them ignore ancient Christian meanings of basic christian virtues. If you read about the old Church fathers, the apostles, or even texts from monastics, you will be shocked how mutch more spirtual and indepth they go. In the teachings of Chirst, and even go to deep details through the whole bible, and Traditions. But when you read about protestant founders, and their views. Its eather missing the point, undiciplined radicaliam, or lack of spirituality to bigin with, or ignoring ancient Traditions. And worst of all, even removing Books from the bible.

​@@thatwhitewolf5222 True. I found more interest reading abojt Orthodoxy and Catholicism thinking than Protestant Thought. Heck. I even learned why "Pray for us" became ingrained in Catholicism and Orthodoxy. It actually comes from Early Christian Persecution when they hid in Catacombs. It was how they saw that those who died or Martyred are still part of the Church. And that was asking them to pray of them on Earth. Once I learned this I realized that no. Iconoclasm that the Protestants did was throwing the Baby out with the Bathwater.

This reminds me of that scene from Starship Troopers where Michael Ironsides explains the state.

Your teacher was based AF

@@BLOODYMESSI4H Oh he was a great guy! He told us the German's and Italians were socialists when all other history teachers said they were not. But he actually fought them so he had a first hand knowledge. He made us learn the American revolution, the 2 world wars and the entire Cold War over the 8th grade year in history and it was so much fun. He passed away in 2001 right before 9-11! HE would hate the state of the world right now.

And the guy was factually incorrect just like this insane video

@@tidakada7357 Always amusing to see socialists out themselves.

They are hating peasants so much aren’t they? No warlord was so cruel to peasants. The most hardworking, most beneficial people for society. The ones who were feeding them.

And that's the lesson: never let a zealot gain power. Never ever.

@@signorasforza354No, they didn't. That's why they kicked him out of the party.

@@tempejkl didn’t ask a cummie

Confucius is perennially apt. The role of the family, and of language, in keeping a people on the 'straight and narrow' - and what happens when either are no longer sound and rooted in reality - is as relevant to what we see around us as ever.

Correct, he was an average socialist.

"Capitalists of the world will remember my carbuncles!".

He was an exceptional Socialist.​@@theywouldnthavetocensormei9231

a monster created by plutocrats, grandson of rabbis, never stepped foot in a factory or smelled the sweat of the proletariat married with the millionaire Jenny, in 1843, or rather, the daughter of the aristocrats of the Westphalen house. As we can see, Moses Mordechai's greatest love, , was indeed Capital and money.

@@LoganLS0 that's like being an exceptionally tall midget.

Problem is there are not that many good dads out there

Starting to see why the commies pushed feminism as one of their first vectors of attack?

Such as life.

Starting to see where feminism fits into all this?

@@theywouldnthavetocensormei9231 One of the worst ideologies to plague mankind.

There is a reason honor thy father and mother is so important.

Laziness stems from poor parenting there not equal issues

Look at the propaganda coming out of Hollywood. All designed to damage family life. Look at how men(fathers) are demonised. Look at posh kids at campuses zero in on the evils of their own country's past but ignore the present day evils of other countries. And 100 wars worldwide at this moment, but which one do they protest?

Uh, H*tler was literally the opposite of lazy

Lenin, Stalin, and Hitler were, by any definition, extreme workaholics, to the point of damaging their own health. They had virtually no private lives and lived for their work. This video's thesis is pretty stupid, and just.. pandering.

People believe frauds. They do crazy things when you promise them some free cookies.

@signorasforza354 I know. Still, his claims are so outrageous, and he is such an obviously ignorant and borderline batshit crazy source that it strains credulity that soo many supposedly intelligent people fall for it....

@@marksharp3990 Those intelligent people are frauds themselves, morally corrupted people or people with psychological problems because of bad upbringing. Every time I was having a discussion with an “intelligent” communist, in the end they were praising, justifying, denying or minimizing all horrendous stuff commies did and were slandering their opponents and victims with ridiculous lies. Cummunism is a religion for thugs.

​@@marksharp3990What of his claims were "outrageous"?

@sepijortikka Well, the labor theory of value for one. Another being the hilarious claim a all powerful state will ever give up that power and "whither" away.

That's a good redemption story, thank you for sharing. It's great to hear you're working for yourself and having your life in order! And it's true that the people who remain socialist have that fixed mindset and never truly become successful in life. Yet, they can't see it.

Amazing self assessment, thank you for sharing! (I was also raised & state educated in the North of England but I now reside in the USA 🇺🇸 where I lead a bougie life. I doubt I would have the same lifestyle ⛳️ 🏊 🌴 if I had stayed in Yorkshire 😂😂😂)

@@TheImperatorKnight theres nothing in the core of altruism that says youre less worth than others, or a bad person... where do you even come up with this from? tryl ooking at some altruism forum for one second and see how much people believe theyre terrible persons... what are you even talking about?? and what does socialism and altruism have in common? theyre directly opposed as socialism leads to the worst results for the average human in a society...

​@wasdwasdedsf there's nothing wrong with altruism as an action and virtue, but he clearly explains in the beginning of the video how going too far with the concept destroys a person's image of themselves and others. The problem with many religious groups is that they teach the altruism without teaching the deeper concepts of how God wants our actions to be voluntary and from the heart, not forced on us by shallowly explained strict rules.

legendary comment

Exactly narcissists

Trump is a narcissist and is not a socialist

A lot like most American presidents. 😂 Greed Greed Greed.

Yeah I am only partway into the video but Tik missed the mark a bit. He is going on about altruism but it was clear these guys are narcs like you said. Not real atruism but performative. Goodness used like a suit that you put on for a party.

@@SevPlays They wanted altruism to come their way.

Yes! Most radical leftists from the 60s came from comfortable upper class or upper middle class backgrounds and never had to work their way through college. It's definitely a pattern.

The reason studying REAL history is crucial....

Never met an actual working class leftist before, most of them are more conservative or libertarian while most leftists are middle to upper class.

@@coke8077You've just outed yourself as someone who doesn't talk to working class people. Funny.

Yes because modern leftists are closet Marxists

As St Paul said, "“Let each of you look not ONLY to his own interests, but ALSO to the interests of others.” ‭‭

I think the problem is extreme altruism to the point of shame and guilt. Survival instinct causes us to want to take care of ourselves. Extreme altruism causes guilt over this, so a mental schism happens. The socialist deludes themselves into holding self righteous opinions that are simultaneously self serving. This tortured existence is destructive to themselves and everyone around them

@@iamalphalimI’m a Christian and my altruism has gone too extreme because I have tremendous self-hatred.

​​​​​​​​​​​@@BlueSpirit006 Altruism is different from being a doormat or feeling forced (by you) to do what you dont want to do, or to accept what harms your being or denigrates you, or injures your dignity. Altruism is joyously helping and benefiting others out of sincere love, and a warm and kind selflessness. The more you give in this loving manner, the more fulfilled you are (not empty). But to truly love others, you must first love, accept and acknowledge yourself as God's beloved child. You might have misunderstood Christianity, unfortunately (I made this mistake when I was young). Knowing that you are God's beloved child who will inherit His Kingdom, only makes you more confident in yourself. Knowing that He will always forgive you, and eternally love you, makes you feel safe and accepted. Sure, you have to do your best not to commit sin, because sin distances you from God. But it is not God who distances from the sinner, but the sin itself creates the distance. However, God always sends you His grace, help and insights to support you in the path and to help you overcome your flaws and weaknesses. You have a Father and Best Friend always at hand, and always caring and forgiving. Therefore, you are never lonely or unloved, you always have His ever present company, encouragement and affection. On the other hand, the one whispering those thoughts of self-hate and inadequacy is the devil. He wants you to feel undeserving of God and therefore to distance yourself from Him. It is evil to self-hate. Why? Because you are God's peak of Creation, and even His own beloved son/daughter. If you hate yourself you are hating God's masterpiece, His own child. The devil really loves inciting this feeling on humans, so they destroy themselves. The devil wants to harm or hurt God where it would affect Him the most: His children. Do not listen to him. Embrace God's love and acceptance. Do your best to stay away from sin, and when you fail, repent, ask Him to forgive you, and simply try again, but without fear or dread. Trust God. He knows who you are and that you are trying. He is not a tyrant, but the total opposite: all loving, compassionate and forgiving. Let God set you free once and for all (from the lies and deception of the devil, as He did with me). I wish you the very best! 🙏 💕

@@luzclara3855 I know, I agree with you. But helping others is what makes me feel alive, makes me feel like a human. Being in a monastery or a church makes me feel like a weight has been lifted off my shoulders. I hate myself because I have failed God too many times and haven’t been a great Christian either (in terms of reading prayers and attending services). I’m Eastern Orthodox, so we are more somber or strict because the world is a mess for us and we have no place in it because it is filled with infidelity and hate.

How is feminism different then how you viewed it in the past? Or if I'm misunderstanding can you please expand

@@tylermorrison420 I was total normie, I honestly thought it was about female empowerment. This was also a very artsy clique, the witchy tattoo girls

Feminism = pear shaped socialism in comfortable shoes

Have you seen the Fiamento Files here on RU-vid? I also thought that feminism was about equality and that if I didn't agree with it, I'd be considered to be against women. Vile stuff that ideology is

@@PinkTorpedo909 I was in my 20s in the 90s, and I remember all the trendy white girls became "wiccans" to be hip and "rebel against patriarchy". My, how far things have gone.

Don't talk shit, bro. Emiliano Zapata wasn't a pleb; he actually had property. We could put him between middle class and high middle class by contemporary standards. He WASN'T a socialist at all; he was very skeptical and aggressive towards the idea of land redistribution as the marxists proposed He was CATHOLIC reactionary in his roots, his movement was motivated by the management and organization of land that the Crown of Spain had established in the indigenous communities, torn down with the masonic and traitor government of liberals in the XIX century leaded by the traitor Benito Juarez. His image has been used by the stupid socialists who, as always, take idols and heroes who have nothing to do with socialism. The lack of their own true heroes motivates this narrative and propaganda. Pancho Villa in the other hand has humble origins and a more though childhood, son of plebs, no studies, no education, no property at all, And again he as well was very antisocialist, in fact Pancho Villa has more in common with fascist and nationalist views. He was anti yankee, anti chinese, and he also had antisemitic views.

Not really. A slew of communist militants as well as party / state leaders hailed from humble circumstances, to say the least. Foremost amongst them N. S Khrushchev. Along with Walter Ulbricht, Ernst Thalmaan, Earl Browder, Maurice Thorez, Harry Pollitt, Francisco Largo Cabellero, Doleres Ibarurri, Janos Kadar, Josip Broz Tito, Nicolae Caecesku(sic), Wladislaw Gomulka,..the list is nigh on interminable…

What about Stalin?

@@tempejkl Wasn't his early life quite cleric, being raised by a local church father?

@@tyvamakes5226 He was originally going to be a priest (idk about his father). He wrote poems under a pseudonym and became a local sensation for his poems. Then, when he became a socialist, he put his life on the line for the revolution, robbing banks to raise funds, and then being sent to forced labour camps for this.

Nah. He made her tingle downstairs. All that counts.

Can you not see the humour, sub text, the irony, dare I even mention the love, behind the remark? Of course it was a bad trade deal, this is a Joke since it wasn't a trade deal. And can you bear the idea that her family were rather fond of Carlo? Go and read a bloody biography by yourself instead of cherry picking quotes to support your prejudices.

His artwork was brilliant. Iv got a copy of his painting of the Virgin Mary and child. It's brilliant. Iv saw seen many of his paintings. They are brilliant.

He was better than most I've seen.

@@Occident. If you have to say "brilliant" that many times, it indicates that you don't really believe what you're saying.

@@theywouldnthavetocensormei9231 Isn't art brilliant! It is like pictures you can hang on your wall and then look at them ! Brilliant!

He was completely self taught. If he would have had formal training he could have gone far

As an ex-socialist myself, I can say they're probably not aware of any of what I said in the video. Also, just to point out, Freud and Carl Jung were both Hermeticists. After learning this fact, I no longer view their opinions so highly.

​@@TheImperatorKnightthe enemy of gnostics is both orthodoxy or catholicism(protestantism doesn't count,it emulates some of their points,especially the rapture crowd).

I've known 2 committed socialists that I've talked to a lot over decades and gotten to know well. And, no, they have no idea that there's a psychological and developmental aspect to their beliefs. They think they're rational and anybody who doesn't agree with them must be stupid. The first was an only child whose mother spoiled the hell out of him and his father told him to be a Man. He thought that having a penis was good enough. He found a menial job where he only had to work a couple of hours a day and his boss let him spent the rest of the day reading. He complained bitterly about the job and his boss. He wanted to be an intellectual but he hated writing. It cut into his drug taking. He thinks that most people are stupid. The other one had a good father but she hated her mother. She has Mother Derangement Syndrome: Anything her mother is for she has to be against. She had to raise her kids by herself so she had to have a series of minimum wage jobs where she felt like she was being exploited by capitalism. All the evils of the world were the fault of capitalists. She loves Marx and she had the Vision while living on the streets of San Francisco during the Summer of Love. Dugs were involved. She's deeply unhappy and thinks most people are stupid. She most wants to be recognized as a great artist. In both cases it was obvious that they became socialists because of family dynamics but neither could see it. They're both trying to get revenge on what they feel is a cruel world.

Well, capitalism is really the same coin. Yes, millions died under communism. However millions died under the white supremacist capitalism.

@TIK - and yet you've utterly fallen into Freud's trap. "Family problems "of some conceivable kind, strict parenting with physical abuse, as well as profound religiousness, missing or absent parent(s), were all not only very common, but might under a wider sense be said to have been the norm. Depending on how wide you make the goalposts, anybody could have some kind of problem. These people were not lazy by any measure... I am just personally very disappointed in this showing, TIK. Hope you get out of this rabbit hole before you end up thinking it's all about penises or their height or some such nonsense :).

I don't think there is an antidote. How many people can admit that they wasted their life?

​@@neilreynolds3858 Theyll be forced to either way. Reality always delivers the mail. So either do it now, or let it build up more and suffer greater later on.

Sounds like the “children of Woke” 😅

The fact you were able to post this on this type on video is great. My comment would be scrubbed immediately

Capitalism is the same in essence but manifests differently: "I'm not good enough as I am, so I have to earn Daddy's approval by making lots of money and crushing my enemies in the market." Capitalism would collapse if people loved themselves unconditionally, because they would no longer feel the need to strive for wealth - only to have "just enough" - which would likely lead to a distributist economy.

Yet their altruism seems selfish to me

Neither extreme would be a functional society. Pure altruism is suicidal and gets nothing done in the long term. Pure selfishness would be a chaotic hyper violent society due to no cooperation and constant conflict of every sort.

This is why the eastern philosophies don’t suffer from nearly the same tragedy as western ones. While western philosophies are rooted in an incessant obsession with good and evil and each existing independently of the other, in addition with a goal of reaching some sort of perfect good, eastern philosophies tend to be more grounded and accept the realities of the world as they are. While good is valued, it is not elevated into some extreme and that is the base concept of the so called “yin and yang”, and the emphasis on balance.

​@@Nakuke3You have to be extremely ignorant of Eastern history to say their philosophies caused "no tragedy". I mean, if you think Christian altruism is too radical, you should check out Jainism.

The honest inner monologue of every socialist.

My follow-up to that is: A considerable number of the people that adhere to the ideology of socialism have deluded themselves into believing that merely existing is grounds for being provided for. They lack the critical thinking ability to recognize that if everyone acted as they did, society would collapse because nobody would produce anything. At the same time, if the rewards for contributing are no better than rewards for not contributing, that disincentivizes people from working. Why should I be working when I'm no better off than those who don't? The crucial step in transitioning from a capitalist to a socialist society is equalizing the standard of living for the welfare class and the working class. This demoralizes the working class to such a degree that they see any change at all as an improvement of the status quo.

@@Subzeropole I think they know that people would stop producing if they didn't have to provide for themselves, but it goes back to what you said about them thinking of themselves as intellectually superior. They think they're the only ones clever enough to figure out they can just sit on their ass all day and get a free handout, because the rest of us dummies would be out working to provide for them.

👍👍

I mean, they were all clearly talented. Nobody will make a videos about you in 100 years and you will be lucky if any of your descendants mention you.

Not only Vory(aka robbers) but Vory and KGB. Criminals and kgb are two foundations of ruzzia. That’s why they love cummunists. Because cummunists love thugs.

Comintern was functioning just like mafia.

Mafia and communist are two wings on the same bird

As most of the revolutionaries, if there was no funding from secret services of foreign powers, the fighters for a better and more just world resorted to burglary, robbery and extortion. Stalin was quite skilled and qualified in these activities. So was the Polish National hero - Pilsudski - another revolutionary against the Russian Tzar and a far worse dictator than the absolute monarch.

it is a pretty important doctrinal difference. Though the altruism described as part of Lenin's upbringing is neither lutheran, catholic, or christian altogether.

And Orthodox see Catholics as the first protestants, becuse they rebeled against the old system, with thr papacy and Filioque. When we see that both these things where not the first 1000 years a thing.

Iam a protestant... but the problem becomes when u demand others see things u see them. Even though i KNOW iam right i dont force it on others or see their points as invalid. Its not the way of life people choose, but how much they make it other peoples problems.

The faith/scripture alone doctrine gives permission to be idle. Why strive to be better when you can piggy back off Jesus's goodness?

@@emmap1159 Why do you think you can offer any goodness without Jesus?

You forgot sponges.

Mostly born into some middle class wealth, maybe upper, or watched Dad climb out of lower class and perhaps some helped with Dad's family business or farm. TIK sees Altruism. I'm not 100% familiar with Ayn Rand's definition of altruism, but she means a dark version of that, and towards extremes or elusive perfection. (Another disagreement that I have is that almost everyone in those days grew up in a religious household. I think even the peasants, but that was probably different for the literate middle class. Yet not everyone became a hate-filled frustrated altruistic socialist. I also think hard fathers were the norm in those days. Life was much harder for everyone.) Perfectionism, a neurotic obsession, coupled with the inability of Self to achieve final perfection (because that doesn't exist), coupled with resentment of others who fail to meet one's demands for perfection, is fertile soil for self hatred and hatred of everybody else. "I am brilliant and everyone else is stupid and evil. Or is it the opposite, I am stupid and evil but everybody else can function okay. Well f__k them all. F__k me too." (I just thought of Kurt Cobain hating himself for the alleged reason that the rock music he invented wasn't _absolutely_ original and non-derivative.) I see resentment about "injustice", projected onto others, a ridiculous sense of entitlement, unearned, and an egotistic desire to be king of the world. Another Objectivist channel, focusing more lately on Israel, describes Palestinians and Hamas as altruistic. How? A LITTLE BACKGROUND: This Is despite the fact that the entire philosophy of Hamas, rooted in the words of Muhammad about killing Jews and stealing from the Jewish religion, to declare himself the final and most superior prophet, with a direct connection to God, and a life of stealing from caravans and extorting other kings and leaders, Hamas is all about destruction of Israel yet NOT one word in their 1988 Manifesto about creating a state called Palestine. (The Palestinian movement, its "father" Al-Husseini, a top Intelligence officer appointed directly by Hitler, REJECTED that option of establishing an independent Arab state, since at least 1936.) So what does that have to do with altruism? The objectivists say that their willingness or eagerness to DIE, to have their children and grandchildren DIE, to reclaim the honor of Arabs (the group or Umma), and to fulfill Allah's commands via Muhammad, is seen by objectivists as the ultimate in Self-Sacrifice. But it's really extreme selfishness, from a different angle. I see Self sacrifice as more like giving a beggar $1 or a few, giving an annoying friend without a car a ride to a meeting or to run errands, working overtime for money during a work crisis, arguing in favor of Zionism with no pay, after having spent years arguing against it in favor of social justice. Blecch! 🤮 Not as a lifelong crusade to kill or try to cause injury to enemies who disrespected Allah, and to continue to do so despite the factor of high risk of death.

Two outta three brother. Good call for the most part.

Never met a communist with callouses on there hands, yet they expect a guy like me to blindly obey them.

Stalin - Born into a peasant family in Georgia - Worked in a Siberian work camp after robbing a bank under the Tsar, in order to give funds for the revolution. Not a mooch or leech, worked in the background of the communist party as secretary, and was voted in because everyone appreciated his role. If we look at Trotsky, we'll notice something different. - Born into a fairly wealthy family, could probably call it middle class. - Did not work in labour as far as I know, but did revolutionary agitation, even in 1905 - Not really a mooch/leech, but actually organised when Lenin wasn't there. Not respected as much due to his argumentative nature. Lost the Soviet Leadership and kept trying to destabilise the nation, sent to Kazakhstan, still kept doing it, so sent to other places, where he kept doing it, so he got kicked out again and again, until ending up in Mexico and was assasinated by an ex-Trotskyist (rumoured to be in the NKVD, however there was no evidence so far.)

TIK probably read this and thought "damnit he's right, I'm not done"🤣

Re-return?🙊

And yet, you would watch those 7 hours on a device made in a socialist (communist) country 🤣😁

@@aleksazunjic9672 And you watch this video on RU-vid which is a capitalist corporation 😂😂

​@aleksazunjic967 nah my phone is made in south Korea and that is not socialist

My dad was an atheist. He didn't like being told that doing whatever he wanted to do was wrong. It was amusing to be taken to church on Sunday and then listening to my dad tell me why it was all BS afterwards.

Maybe you wouldn't call me an "edgy athiest[sic] anti christian", but I can assure you that I am very definitely a conclusional atheist, and absolutely opposed to the filth that is christianity. I paid close attention to the sermons I heard twice every Sunday throughout my formative years, and I have read a lot since then, both by christians and by atheists, in addition to even more material on RU-vid, including people who are showing where christians got their ideas from. Hint: it should far more be called Greco-Roman than "Judeo-christian". Maybe the real problem is that your parents were too lazy to look into / teach you about christianity?

@@stephannaro2113 yeah being anti-theist isn't "edgy atheism" when you actually know how destructive religion can be (and frequently is), and it most certainly is not entirely a bunch of bitter believers coping about there being no god, although there are a lot of those too.

@@hckr_-gh7se People who are bitter that YHWH doesn't exist... sheesh!

Many self-proclaimed athiests get into what is called a secular religion i.e a cult..

Good luck m8

TIL I have all the hallmarks of a socialist dictator Good thing I hopped on the capitalism train as soon as I could.

Good luck. Rooting for you.

I feel you brother

You can do it

I have not red demons but the Social democrats or the Marxists used it as inspiration, at least Stalin but I assume the other prominent ones did as well.

Dostoyevsky himself was a property of government after amnesty. Russian empire was a collectivist country without any property rights. Everything was belonging to tzar. Even thoughts. No laws, no court, private property, no rights. Only obedience and serfdom.

@@signorasforza354 So thats why communism took over so easily, it was basicly the same thing

@@Jamespwickstromw Exactly. Even now russians don’t have any ideological or psychological dissonance in praising empire and ussr at the same time.

@@Jamespwickstromw You are right. Even now russians don’t feel any contradiction when they praising empire and ussr in the same time.

Indeed. And Jesus's criticisms of it were primarily aimed at the very same corrupt intentions of chasing an outward appearance of generosity and overall "righteousness" that we see among "altruists." "Virtue-signaling", in modern parlance. He never advocated for creating hierarchical systems to take up the burden of charity, and the Parable of Talents is explicitly capitalist in principle and describes the very Pareto distribution that socialists have been waging ideological war against.

Judaism is a form of Satanism. There is no denying of that . Veil from the temple was torn from top to bottom.

It's also forbidden in actual Christianity. Unfortunately, TIK, as good as he is, hasn't studied the subject enough. The whole "he had a religious upbringing, therefore he became a socialist" thing is a bit silly, since EVERYONE had the identical religious upbringing back then, and 99.9999% of those with "religious upbringings" didn't become revolutionary socialists.

@@historyandhorseplaying7374 And most of those who are Lutheran were in German-speaking areas. Which... yeah there's like a 50% chance they would have been Lutheran at the time in that case.

@@professorhaystacks6606 Yep and if they'd grown up in Bavaria they'd likely have had Catholic religious upbringings, like everyone else too.

First! Congrats!

Up next: 1 hour of TANKS 🤟

@@TheImperatorKnight I'll take tanks or philosophy or economics - anything but TIK's psychoanalyses. He's a smart guy with a wide base of knowledge, but this one is finally well outside his scope. I think there's confirmation bias. People who are intellectually misled into being socialists can and do come from all backgrounds, and are often passionate workaholics (indeed like both Lenin, Stalin, and Hitler). TIK's not only going against his own individualist position (apparently unknowingly?) - by diminishing personal agency, but if he goes down this Freudian rabbit hole he'll end up thinking it's all about height or penis size or whatever.... :D

​@@TheImperatorKnight great replacement video when??

I believe that the pattern is still there though. He was raised Catholic, was separated from his parents, lost the faith etc. I'd need to look at him in more depth though to be sure.

Stalin certainly didn't avoid work. He was in a forced labour camp in Siberia, after risking his life for the revolution, by robbing a Tsarist bank to raise funds.

Tito is often praised in the former Yugoslavia because the working class actually lived pretty well and had good opportunities in life, even better than today in some areas.

As you should.

Who is John Galt?

That is such a deceptive statement. Do you know what it really means?

I agree with this statement so much. "I think, therefore I am." has brought so much destruction to the modern world. The truth is always "I am, therefore I think."

@@WolfeTone17-98 are you tarded?

😂

To me the more I learned of and read Karl Marx, the less I understand how people think he was correct.

He managed to develop an interesting veneer of authority

​@@haraldbredsdorff2699, which books have you read?

@@Μελίνα-σ1ν Communist manifesto and das capital.

Plus they always see themselves as the victims, as the poor. I've never seen a socialist give to charities, never.

I don't think anyone minds if other people are altruistic. At worst its likely only to damage their own lives. The problem is that they want other people to behave as they do. When altruism is enforced by the government by taxation its simply another form of oppression. That's the difference between someone standing in the corner with a coin box and someone who jangles their coin box and blocks your way into the supermarket.

You cannot be a socialist without being altruistic. Socialism requires altruism, since the "equality" principle is based upon it. Altruism is all about helping others. The question is: why are others in need of help? Because the system (capitalism) is bad. Material reality does not provide equality, and this, material reality is bad, and we must overcome it by coming together and helping our fellow men via the collective (the state). This, altruism is against material reality ("nature") and the free market. This is the reason they blame others, like you said. They think that men who are left to their own devices will devour each other like a swarm of rats. Therefore, other men are the problem in their eyes. That's why they call for a socialist "New Man".

@@TheImperatorKnight You didn't actually respond to what the other commenter said - you just reiterated your own view.

@@TheImperatorKnightyou’re identifying a lot of specific phrases with specific ideas instead of what those specific ideas represent and it kinda shows the whole hypocrisy of your RU-vid channel. You make a lot of claims, you bring up a lot of points, but your dunning Kruger wins out in the end. As does mine.

... Damn

And Teddy cracked down on corporations and fought against capitalist businessmen. Your point is?

​@@tempejklhe attacked corruption and monopoly. That is pro capitalist. He made money through writing, not taking bribes as do modern progressive politicians.

Are you denying the identified pattern? Did all of these socialists not have religious upbringings, an altruistic morality system, parental issues, and a fear of independence that resulted in indolence?

@@TheImperatorKnight Yes I do. Your talk is an exercise in procrustian reductivism. Just about everybody had a religious upbringing in those days. Rand has also led you astray on altruism. You should read Adam Smith on this subject. Nor were many of them indolent (a word you stress wrongly); they worked hard on their revolutionary activity. Independence? They went their own way with a vengeance. Also, we only have Hitler's word on his father.

​@@micksherman7709 until you make an hour long refutation dense with sources, you've got nothing lol

@@tear728 Try common sense, duh.

using altruism to feed the narcissism of oneself

No, I think it makes sense. If you believe that being altruistic unconditionally is good, then what does that make everyone who isn't completely altruistic?

@@trollerjakthetrollinggod-e7761 'what does that make everyone who isn't completely altruistic?' Not perfect, like everybody else. The train of thought that you imply doesn't fit at all. It's part of Christian believe that no human is perfectly good, but that we are ALL sinners unable to be truly good by ourselves and that we are in need of the grace of God for redemption. Redemption theology is particularly Lutheran by the way. That someone believes he himself is perfect while others are not (and even expendable) contradicts Christian teaching completely. The socialist mentality of tying to create some kind of heaven on earth, no matter how many victims that requires, lacks any altruism.

@@lars9925 "the road to hell is paved with good intentions", look at it this way. Socialists believe that people who have lots of money are bad and must actively give it away to every underprivileged individual they pass in order to redeem themselves. It's also important to note that the idea that we are all sinners in need of redemption is completely rejected by socialists, who believe that everyone is inherently good and it's just capitalism and hierarchy that makes them bad.

@@trollerjakthetrollinggod-e7761 Well, Socialists believe that people who have lots of money have to be FORCED to give it away (and the formerly rich have to be further punished). And the money shouldn't go directly to any underprivileged people but to the all powerful state that will distribute it 'fairly'. Socialist redemption is not gained by any material goods but buy loyalty to the party. You can have a luxurious life if you work for the 'cause'. I agree with your 2nd point. Socialist thinking arises from a (distorted) sense of justice, but not on an individual level, it's purely on the collective level. Everything can fall victim to the perceived greater good. Altruism on the other hand happens on an individual level, it has to do with personal sacrifice and being kind to an individual.

I dislike the semantics game so to speak in a basic form The problem with modern capitalism is that corporations have paid off daddy government so there is next to zero antitrust legislation ENFORCEMENT This is why we have a small handful of corporations and “stakeholders” that now collude to own everything I truly wish that people would include this fact when they attack “capitalism” because it’s the reason why it’s failing When Blackrock has: $10,000,000,000,000 in wealth = OF COURSE capitalism is going to fail If you have intact families that own small businesses = a much healthier system We are now back in the 20’s with robber barons all over again

Goverments are teaching gay sex for kids nowadays

@anthroimperzia3927 Voting? Hows democracy any different from communism, with the means of production of even law, defense and justice publicly owned, some of the most important things and as such the most important to remain fully within the free/black market only.

@anthroimperzia3927can you define “good parent”

Altruism is an extreme form of behaviour. A balanced person does things for others and for themselves.

Someone did a study of the paternal relationships of the 100 or so most cited feminists, and couldnt find many that had a good relationship with their father.

@@elLootogonna see a lot of feminists and dictators in the next 50 years 😂

@@elLootowhere can I find more info on that? Really interested.

TIK used Ayn Rand’s definition which is why Altruism is being cast in such a negative light. Who was one of the most anti-altruistic people ever to live. In short a dictionary should have been used to define Altruism, not a political thinker who completely opposes the idea.

True, my take is that it is a politically motivated message with cherry picked examples and definitions.

il sung or his son

I haven't found that altruism per se leads to socialist or totalitarian inclinations, not in the people I know. I know lots of hard-working Christians and Jews who are both ambitious and generous, as well as religiously unaligned people with similar traits. The dangerous kind of altruism is the sort that expects EVERYONE ELSE to be altruistic without being altruistic oneself. For if one is going to behave in an altruistic manner, one has to do things for others or give them stuff, and this requires work, and in real practical life, it requires one to be pretty much self-supporting, both so that one isn't having to take from others and so that one has something to give to others. -- I think that Romantic utopianism is dangerous, and I think that one of the advantages of the Judeo-Christian tradition is that it locates the perfect domain as other-worldly. (Plato's domain of the forms was similarly other-worldly.) As a general rule, I think it's important to keep ideal notions distinct from one's understanding of the real world. -- Another ideology that fails to keep this straight is scientism, which is implicit in Marxism and in the insanity that is the WEF.

This video left out the influences culture has on people whether they work or not whether they are literate or not. China for example and even today- honour there ancestors- are subject to their parents at any age etc. same with German Cambodia and it’s culture and expectations. Nothing functions in a vacuum. Don’t think-generally speaking these people were lazy as they worked and went to jail for their ideas. The WW1 was left out as such a huge influence it had on the world and Ideas. These people were Psychopaths

probably should have said socialist revolutionaries

Well said!

There's a book called "The Six Pillars of Self-Esteem" by Nathaniel Branden that you may want to check out. It has helped me personally, and by the sounds of it I think you will get something from it too. A lot of psychology has been based on the works and Freud and Jung, both of whom were Hermeticists. Thus, in my opinion (and it is just an opinion), a lot of therapists are ill equipped to deal with real-life issues. It therefore falls upon our shoulders to do the majority of the work to figure ourselves out. For me personally, I have have found the works of Ayn Rand and Leonard Peikoff's books on Objectivism extremely helpful, even if at first it doesn't seem like they should be. The negative stigma they have delayed me from looking into them, and I regret that. There's no point in building a house on sand - you've got to have a good philosophical foundation, otherwise it's a fruitless endeavour.

​@@TheImperatorKnight Freud seems to have only superficially copied from Yoga. The 3-level system for example (It, Ego, Superego is Manas, Ahamkhara, Buddhi) is way more sophisticated and intricate in its comprehension. Buddhi, which Buddhists seek to cultivate to see reality as objectively as possible for one, is not remotely understood like that in the West. Instead "Reason" is at the same time called harsh and inhumane by the Gnostics and their derivatives, while also claiming to be the only ones to have "Reason"; likely in that endless "wolf in sheep's clothing" ruse. The Enlightenment thus had to fail because it was not led by "Reason" but instead a lot of irrational socialist gobbledigook. A lot of the Hermeticism/Gnosticism goes further back than Orphicism from what I can tell. There are mentions/complaints about "dialectic sophists who confuse government, to the detriment of the people" ascribed to Konfuzius and Laotse in the 6th century BC in ancient China. Respective books are still later in the stack of books to my right. I'll get there eventually. My first hint about that I had read in a foreword of a not so great translation of the Tao te King by Victor von Strauß. Looking further into Yoga, Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism, of which the latter is incomprehensibly ancient, Gnosticism/Hermeticism seems like a direct heresy as the simple product of the limitations of the Narcissistic mind. The Demiurge becomes a necessity for the human mind, especially the emotionally immature, seeks to anthropomorphize everything by default for a more digestible world-model. Hence these ill formulations of, for example, "evolution does" or "evolution wants", ascribing an active will to a passive process. The emotionally immature (narcissist), who totally has figured everything out and knows what God wants and is just helping on the way to accelerate it all towards the paradisical, utopian conclusion, insists to mess around with systems that should not be messed around with by the minds of children, for each time it has spelled doom for humanity (Labour Theory of Value, Lysenkoism, a certain anti-biological ideology currently wrecking academia, which Stanislaw Lem already described as a goal of the Communists, in his "Star Diaries and Memoirs of Iyon Tichy"; highly recommended read, no matter the lacking quality of the English translation). For protocol: In Taoism, as far as I understand it, there is no creator with a will, there is no plan or intent, the whole thing just "is". The creation-source therefore also has no name and there is no point in worshipping it, and everything just comes from it and returns to it eventually. The word "tao" is effectively just a placeholder. Taoism is passive. But the emotionally immature narcissists cannot comprehend passivity, they are never satisfied without having something concrete they can rebel against and take its place in a childish, almost animalistic, game of dominance hierarchy in the tribe. Hence, they need all this demiurge and material prison nonsense. In the system of Taoism, all things Gnosticism, Hermeticism, Socialism, Narcissism as a whole, is only ticking the boxes of "Yin" (the overt, dark, female, taking, destroying) and none of its opposites ("Yang"). Therefore a "whole" can never be achieved through these incomplete limited lenses that the immature mind that has no Buddhi can provide. Likewise the entire idea of Alchemy seems to be a heresy of these older systems describing mere "interrelatedness of the elements", no magical spells, just a metaphorical help to, for example, understand that when one organ (ie lungs (metal)) being afflicted (water in them) indicates a weakness of another organ in the relation-cycle (heart (fire)) being too weak. Which is exactly what happens in conditions like heart inflammation. Treating the symptom of the water in the lungs is not enough, for the root cause of the symptom lies elsewhere, and the heart needs to be strengthened (ie by a pacemaker). Laugh about TCM as you wish, for most of it is charlatanery nowadays, but the foundation is a mere product of observation and building a usable model. Western School Medicine as well has a great foundation, yet big pharma sells us a lot of placebos with only negative side effects to amortize their deadend research and keep the machine going. At its core, these things are eerily the same. But what does the alchemist do with that old model? S/He anthropomorphizes, adds more magical thinking, lust for power, and thus believes to be able to truly manipulate and invoke the elements by themselves and cast magic. It's nonsense. We also find connections all the way back to descriptions in the Sumerian Pantheon about these personality style interactions, but that's a topic for another time. I'll only mention that the symbolism in that ancient religion seems to have morphed through time and manifested in various religions and ideologies seen to this day, and considering which gods are represented by that is as telling, and congruent, with TIK's video here, as it gets. Suffice to say, it's all checking the boxes of "Yin".

Just so you know, I read out and responded to your comment in my latest video ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-Oe5NezWbQbs.html

Indeed but it is how one responds to the adversities of upbringing though.

I know people with autism who's addictive behavior caused harm to children. The reality is, people are not perfect. And this is exactly why Communism never worked and can never work. They completely ignore the psychology of people and believe everything is upbringing, whereas things like autism clearly has genetic components. Also, it is quite ironic- I know a lot of Russians and to this day most of them suffer from mental issues because of WW2 and then Communism. It is obvious that trauma is past on to children in some form. It is our task as parents to be aware of this and minimize its influence.

Think of it as Venn diagrams or logic. All zebras have stripes but not everything with a stripe is a zebra. So a significant number of despots have the same personality failures but not everyone with that type of personality problem goes on to be a despot.

Something I recommend for all.

He mentioned re ently finding out about their writing fairly recently..

Yup. Sometimes I almost regret reading The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged in high school. Makes things a lot harder sometimes. Who the fuck is John Galt?x

@@frankmueller2781 I can't say I'm a total fan but I've read her stuff and yes I think she has her points and should be read.

Who is John Galt?

Altruism in religion doesn't seem to be making the world better either. How many people have the Christians, Muslims, and Hindus killed?

Maybe though this is my thinking. Altruism taken to the utmost insane conclusion

My fave he did was on R vs K selection theory and how it relates to political affiliation

In practice altruism means redistributing your wealth, not theirs.

Like Netanyahu.

@@Occident. And bush and obama and biden and clinton and bush sen. and reagan and etc.....

@@veryunusual126 sure cummies.

So does lust as much as pride.

​​@@signorasforza354funny- considering much of what you have, wear, eat, use, or affiliate with is probably made at least in part by China..

It is altruism. You may not like this assessment, but it is altruism.

It's certainly not any type of Christian altruism. What this man is describing is just modern-day, political liberalism.

Yeah sounds like the Objectivist definition of altruism, where it is characterised only as an extreme, not the altruism most people understand or practice in their lives.

You are right not all giving has a philosophical construct behind it, it might just be a whim. However on the philosophy of altruism you are a perfect example of what is wrong with it. Re "politicians, businesses, churches, NGOs, international bankers, and all the other 'legal persons' around the world can act in self interest without any real contest". There is nothing wrong with self-interest. That is the basis of most moral actions. Most people accept that there is a hierarchy of responsibilities. You don't owe everyone the same. There is no obligation to those with whom you have no connection.

Individual and collective need aren't opposites though. They are logical certainties. Warring between the two as absolutes is a fight that will never, can never, and was never supposed to be won.

@@unnamedpodcast_thetruth "Individual and collective need aren't opposites though". In principle no, in practice the main method of socialism is to tax individuals for collective purposes, with everything classified as a "need".

@@alanrobertson9790 In the socialist system there are no taxes though 🤔.

@@unnamedpodcast_thetruth If the State owns everything then its possible to disguise the taxes but the result is the same.

True, TIK's definition is kind of self-defeating. He argues that all socialists have been bums, but those socialist dictators took huge responsibilities and had a heavy workload. Lenin's political work was so taxing that he suffered a stroke, Hitler spoke about how his duty to the country had destroyed his health.

What "work" did they do exactly? I reckon they mostly likely delegated most of their responsibilities, and were more of an overseer than anything else. Just as it is now with modern politicians that have others writing their speeches, policies, legislation etc. Ambitious, but they do lack work ethic, and being in government gives them the opportunity to make massive gains while doing the least.

@@die1mayer they didn’t take responsibility, they were committing atrocious human experiments and were failing horribly but their actions were justified by their zealots. Even now they are justifying all disgrace and cringe with plain lies and manipulations.

Good point. I think the laziness and lack of responsibility is only when it's "real" work. They were very excited to work as hard as they could for their own purposes - writing theory, doing revolutionary activity, and the later controlling of the state for Lenin. But when it came to having a normal job whose purpose wasnt to control or gain control, then they were not keen on it.