Thank you for interviewing Dr. Lindsay. His professional research, writing and speaking on the destructive nature of far left Cultural Marxism and postmodern ideology must be more widely known.
I always dug his stuff, but his interactions with Carl Benjamin were pretty rough. That said, its a big tent, and we all have to resist the impulse towards purity spiraling. We're becoming too much like the left for my tastes.
I constantly recommend James Lindsay's *_"New Discourses"_* podcast in comments sections all over RU-vid lol. For anyone who wants to understand, not just what Woke is, but communism, and Marxism as well, that channel is an absolute rare gem. If you think you already understand well enough what Woke, and Wokeness is all about, I would bet you don't lol. It's deeper & darker than the average person is at all comfortable in genuinely coming to terms with, IME. Do yourself a favor, and listen to all of those podcasts that you can. The purpose of the channel is to break it down in an easier to understand way for the average layman anyways, which I myself am, or rather *_was_* lol. He simply reads liturature from their thought leaders, and decodes it for the average person. Because they use a number of language based gatekeeping stratagies to obfuscate what they mean in their own texts, so that primarily *_only their fellow comrades_* will likely understand what is *_really_* being said, because as James Lindsay says all the time in those podcasts lol... *_"They share your vocabulary, but they use a different dictionary."_* They'll use words that you know the definitions of, *_but they have their own, covert definitions attached to those same words, to gatekeep their literature._* To hide in plain sight, leaving a reader who isn't a fellow comrade thinking they understood what they've just read. To prevent people like James from doing what he does, but luckily he can decode it, and does very well. I've been watching New Discourses for years now, and I highly recommend it. 👍💯
"Do happy people hate each other? Do comfortable people hate each other?" Does anyone remember the "Disrupt, Agitate, Aggravate" motto activists were rattling on about in 2020?
"we need to protect property, therefore we have created an organization that is allowed to seize your property unilaterally, but dont worry, we have rules for when it's allowed to seize your property unilaterally, so actually it respects your private property"
Well put James Lindsay here's the point. It doesn't take much to depose the individual King. It takes a lot more to depose hundreds of millions of individual Kings. We the people declare independence. They will never destroy Independence.
Holy crap, I am glad this was on my recommendation feed. I knew of the guest so I watched, but I'm excited to go back and watch from the beginning. Keep it up.
On the subject of private property, James forget to say that nobody can tell you what to do with your property, so when the government tell what to with your property, it's the property of the government.
Yep, just refuse to pay your property taxes and see what happens. The concept of private property has been slowly taken for a hundred years in America!
I think Rousseau is a better prototype for Marx than Plato. Plato sure, especially in regards to the magic tricks, but Rousseau sets up the few special people at the top. Anyway, be sure these ideologues will not stop.
I am taking this note because danish government has threatened me with homelessness if I didnt sacrifice myself to their commands of work, which has made me extremely stress sensitive and sick and even tho I am highly educated and had a promised career, my body shots down when ever I think about work. Their threats, forcing me into cultures, identities, professions etc and me becoming homeless if refusing to do so, is from my point of view, a direct assault on my identity, my privacy, my accumulated ressources that I would lose if I go homeless.
This conversation is absolutely amazing. What an informative video I'm genuinely impressed, but also dissapointed that I'm just finding this channel now.. wtf lol
It's not hierarchy literally it's safety in numbers as instinct. You can have agriculture without pyramids but you cannot have pyramids without agriculture in the oldest of worlds.
2 central banks in America were abolished the reasons primarily were the breaking from two rules currency in the nature of labor for the free exchange of goods and services. The matrix around you is that of built-in obsolescence and planned obsolescence.
James, about this lack of philosophers that defend the indivual, you need to know Brazilian philosopher Olavo de Carvalho. He described his philosophy to be mainly the defense of the indivual against the tyranny of masses.
I love the irony of advertising residency at a farm collective in the middle of talking critically about communism. This idea definitely has appeal; but it has to be voluntary, capitalistic and small scale.
Marx is a product of Hegel and the being a spoiled brat in his upbringing. His dad was a kind soul who loved his son and unfortunately he never disciplined or punished him.
Rene Girard and Nietzsche broke it down best, it was the dominance of Christianity that lead to Marxism. Hegel is a byproduct of the root belief that transformed the west. The genealogy of morality and Rene work on mimesis. These lead to Marxism at the root, Hegel is embedded on top of these root ideas.
Most people don't know how to manage money. This prompts a question. At the start of the internet there was a question do you control the words you use or do the words you use control you. In money a large language model can control you.
They already have a payment system in place where they can limit what is spent. Look at food stamps in the US. You can scan all the booze you want at Walmart, people, but your Foodstamps benefit digital payment system will NOT pay for it. You can't buy organic bananas, only the cheapest food out there. By all means, load up on candy and soda. They already have the means to do this is what I'm saying.
In many ways private property can have been attained and be used with corruption . That obvious fact is often convincing enough to erroneously have people seeing owned property as universally bad . Of course without private property gotten honestly humans would not thrive for without the owning of property mankind would be too bound up to work freely . We would not be free ...
1:25 I don't think Marxism would have gone nowhere without Lenin. As Keyens was a marxist before 1917, there was many socialist parties before ww1 (for e. g. in Germany which later became the SPD and KPD). Also, Lenin wasn't in Germany. He was in Swiss (and allowed to move through Germany to get to Russia).
Anarchies definition is no order absolutely. Mixing that with anything that causes order like play socialism capitalism or any other form of economic security what is paradoxical.
How do you find an observable predicate it's not action reaction and then synthesis. An improper way to question things. One the other all both or none sometimes random. There is never a synthesis. In semantic diplomacy.
To throw my hat in the ring: I think religion allows for the fallen state of man and the separation between god and man cannot be removed, practically this means that if we have a problem like racism, it cannot be solved in absolute terms because the fallen world is intrinsically flawed and god is the only grace which can let us rise above. A cult is utopian and fundamentally believes man can transcend the fallen state of the world and its flaws, rather than trying to foster faith, it tries to compel certainty in its promised utopian end.
Interesting, yet due to man alone in the world without God, something like Marx's dialectical materialism ensures dystopian destruction as the antithesis of the utopian thesis must occur along the path; the necessary synthesis. Literally, nowhere has Communism succeeded in delivering its promises of equality and emancipation. Rather, oppression, famine, and mass murder have followed.
Extreme examples sometimes illusrate the insanity of a point: Lets say that One person owns 99.9 percent of all the land on Earth . Which he then paves over with concrete. Is it still his right to do so. What exactly IS ownership anyway? Rights to exclusive access ? Stewardship ? It is also the “feeling” one gets when one is threatened with the removal of a posession. Sometimes greedy little bullies need to get their hands smacked for not sharing . Thats life . Sorry guys.
53:00 It's not true that most lottery winners lose it all. At least 70% do just fine, don't waste it, or grow it. It's hard to track, but it's a myth based in anecdotes that most people lose it all.
Very good video. Please study- Bruce Lipton,Ernesto Sirolli,Woody Harrelson < Ethos Genesis documentary, The Establishment, James Doty, on Magic, DW documentary, Heirloom seeds . Thanks 🌎❤️🙂
Private property - would include your money, back then money was a commodity not the currency system that we have now. But it's such a good question. As I never really thought about it. But essentially it's your stuff. Not just property as in land ownership. It's business ownership. For example the socialists took the goods in the factory and factory itself. There is liberty and Property by ludwig von mises 50 pages long so rather short on the mises website including a educational videos on what capitalism is.
From this changeover in to capitalism from mercantilism and the change from Divine Right kingdoms into corporations and companies we find a targeting process. Socialism arises from this.
