I think I'm the only moron that thought this was going to be an actual deep dive into the film Half Baked. I even skipped forward three minutes thinking to myself "when is the movie review going to start?"....lol
Houston really is like Anor Lando. The scale is impossibly big, chaotic, yet obviously constructed and conspicuously devoid of life and activity in what should be its beating heart. It feels like it wasn't built for the humans who actually live there and is in fact actively hostile and inconvenient to them. You feel like you shouldn't be in half the places you wind up in. Everyone is aggro and being outside for too long causes status debuffs. You get a sense that this place should have fallen apart long ago but some greater force of hubris is keeping its rot alive and eternal.
i once spent a day walking downtown at the big bridge by the river and mall and after, at the park outside, i was just sitting eating a snack and everyone was staring at me lol
does it have the sort of vast, massive square constructions like those the Vex make in Destiny 2 on like Nessus and Mercury? like the giant city in Inception? I know sort of weird references but I wanted to sort of think about the media im familiar with compared to Houstonian architecture
@@justcommenting4981 i guess what i wanted to convey was that its impossibly massive in scale and artificial/manmade/not natural, but also entirely lifeless, both in the sense of appearance and actually seemingly abandoned, and surreal
Look I'm only here listening to this because I'm allowed a Little Debbie snack once per day and that is exactly one hour and three minutes from now. I need something where I won't just sit here and stare at the clock.
You have to love those rigid idealists on the left that also don't have the same opinion on arming different political groups in completely different circumstances. It's almost like they're reacting to...what do you call it...the way things are in the world as it exists. That or the left is a bunch of different people that might disagree with each every other now and then. Also, thinking that Putin wouldn't invade Ukraine or all of Ukraine isn't an ideology. A prediction of how other people will act doesn't say anything about your conception of morality whether you're right or wrong. I guess it's the only time all the wretched little chihuahuas populating conservative publications can think of where "the left" was wrong about something, so every last one of them has sunk their teeth into it with all their might.
Nice to hear the guys explain cities I have lived in my whole life and reminded me that when I was a kid I use to have nightmares just about the skyscrapers
I was one of the few leftists I knew who saw this coming, and I am not about to hold it over everyone's heads. I don't care that people were wrong, I wasn't particularly intelligent for believing it would happen, and we need to stick together and move forward past this. Articles like this are trying to split that cohesion and I won't support that kind of gloating.
Being right on something like will Russia invade or not doesn't mean anything. Most everyone acknowledged there was a probability and anyone who said things were 100% one way or the other who isn't named Putin is an idiot. Basically what you're saying is you're an idiot who thinks they know things they can't know.
Eric Levitz really loves using words like "socialist" and "leftist" a lot. I'm 31:00 in and I'm surprised he hasn't said "woke" or "cancel culture" yet.
the idea the left critique of foreign policy and NATO expansion is "pro putin" is so baby brained. It holds even less water than the idea that criticizing Israel is anti-semitic. Lots of (spurious) comparisons of Putin and Hitler going around, so I'll bite. Would it be considered a pro-Nazi stance to simply acknowledge that the Treaty of Versailles created conditions and attitudes in interwar Germany that made the Nazis possible? Is finding explanation and context for something the same as finding an excuse for something? That's basically the line journos (article-heads) are taking now. Honestly insulting.
NATO expansion is voluntary and takes all member states unanimously approving entry. Ukraine was never going to join nato. The US has submarines that can kill all life in the planet 10 times over. It doesn’t need Ukraine to destroy Russia. You are literally advocating Putin’s blood and soil rhetoric under a guise of challenging NATO. Oh and the Versailles treaty had nothing to do with the rise of Nazi germany other than it was too lenient
@@johnnyrico3515 talk about "half-baked". "The treaty of Versailles had nothing to do with the rise of nazi Germany". How long have you had this opinion for? I'm going to guess a few weeks.
@@NosyFella it’s pretty much consensus amongst historians who actually study history and not people who get their historical knowledge from Mansteins memoirs and Wikipedia circa 2007. Germany was fully recovered from all penalties imposed by the treaty of Versailles which were in line with the penalties Germany imposed on France during the Franco-Prussian war and not nearly as harsh as the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk that ended the war against Russia in 1918. Most of the stipulations of Versailles were barely enforced and the US bought most of Germany’s debt to the point Germany was an economic and cultural powerhouse in the 1920’s.
@@johnnyrico3515 yes Germany was in major debt, the US bought the debt and then '29 happened. Germany's fake prosperity was exposed. Their industrial capacity had been weakened by Versailles which hindered their economic recovery. The rest is history. Not to mention Versailles became useful propaganda for nazis because of its harshness ("war guilt" etc). Generated the national seige mentality which propelled hitler to power. Was a failure on every front. Could not have gone worse.
@@NosyFella Germany’s industrial capacity was weakened so much that in a mere 10 years it was able to outproduce both France and Britain in heavy armament. It was Germany’s own economic mismanagement that would’ve occurred regardless of reparations payments that hurt its economy. Blaming treaty of Versailles for the rise of Hitler when Imperial Germany’s own imperial ambitions both realized and unrealized were far harsher to its neighbors is white washing Germany’s culpability in both world wars. Did you know that Lebensraum was a goal of WW1 Germany? Yep they wanted to enslave Eastern Europe and it was what they planned to impose if they won. Germany wasn’t dragged into WW1 unwillingly. It sought confrontation at every turn
Chop+Screw your own madlib adventure, it is HTown, after all. Personally, I ran it back x2, didn’t help. Now, I’m stuck at a fork in the road of a decision between either Michael Bublé or Middle East, but then again all I want to be is El Chapo.👑#ripPimpC
Like many movies of the 90's, that movie did not age well, like Schumacher's Batman levels of cringe. Tons of pre-pandemic media is simply irrelevant shit.
An analogous situation would be if a new Canadian government came in and took away all the special accommodations that are made for French speakers in that country.
@@johnstewart7025 Can you get a free high school education in Spanish anywhere in the USA? Can you pass the bar exam in Spanish? What about military exams? no, Spanish is not "treated equally by government" in the USA. The USA does not have an official language, yes, but that has no meaning and is only a way for lawmakers to avoid these issues. There's no law that says you can't discriminate on the basis of English language ability
DSA explicitly refuses to have any position of solidarity with Uyghurs for ideological reasons, Chapo backs this apparently. As for institutional power if that's the argument, it's obvious that a renascent left should not tolerate totalitarian elements if it wants to attract broad-based support. Either DSA is a serious long term project or it isn't
Dude, anyone who’s seen the inside of a DSA chapter knows it’s a pretty much a social club for college students. Whatever “official” stance their leadership has taken is the least of anyone’s worries. They just say they support them because they have to.
it's obvious that a renascent left should not tolerate geopolitical rivals to the american state because cnn told me they are totalitarian and therefore the american state is the lesser evil. i, for one, am riden with biden, how about you my fellow soc dems?
@Porky Russia is a state with the same guy winning „democratic” elections for the last 20 years and where you can get arrested for holding an empty piece of paper in public. There’s few countries as fascist as Russia on the planet and Ukraine is nowhere near. Also, I see a value in people not dying.
"You know, if we’d had honest biology, somehow rigorously held to as a science, we’d probably-this is an impossible scenario, of course-we would somehow not have had the pseudo-racism and the murderous ideology of the Nazis. Suppose that had been the case, if biology had been protected as a science. But it was not, and not in this country either. That is something that the radical Left, including home-grown Stalinist sympathizers, rarely thought about. Of course, there were not many left by my time. But the Khmer Rouge had this notion of the far-Left-which was picked up by the leaders, I’m told, in Paris-that the human mind could be molded to anything to fit the perfect system. What you had to do in Cambodia, then, was bust people out of the “evil” cities and put them in communes and get rid of all those who had been programmed the “wrong way” to get a new paradise. So, on the one extreme, you have the idea of the racial purity idea of an Aryan people, that it’s all about biology. And on the other extreme, an idea of the cultural purity of a radical reforming society. Those are the two extremes, and a lot of people suffered because of them. They were both based on poor science. I guess there are echoes or aftershocks of those ways of thinking, still." -E.O. Wilson (google him, you halfwits!)
The passionate and fiery self-immolation of idealists philosophies vs the comfortable rot and decadence of "realists" philosophies. Humanity has no salvation and is doomed to its own limitations as apes. Guys like Nick Land and the accelerationists/transhumanists are an unbearable breed of sociopaths and self gratifying doomers, but I have to respect a philosophical movement that has the balls to tell it like it is and confront the problem of "humanity can't change it's fundamental condition without changing on a fundamental level" that other philosophical and ethical systems seem to want to skirt around. At least in Nick Land's nightmarish anarcho-libertarian gene-based hyperwar future he isn't pretending that the outcome would be a utopia or is anywhere close to being meant for the humans of today.
Wow. That's incredibly simplistic. Completely clueless about what brought the Nazi's to power, and grossly generalising about all other leftists from one example of a poorly educated leadership who had hardly read Marx and later admitted that they didn't understand it catapulted into power by the fact that the US was bombing their country to pieces for being next to Vietnam.
Not to mention those specific examples are hilarious to pick when having a go at socialism, since they were *both* stopped by communist armies marching in and taking them down. In the Red Army's case, they had a little help, but the Vietnamese did it alone, after having fought the genocidal Americans off, still won quickly against the Khmer Rouge, and for their trouble they got bitched out by the international community for actually doing that military intervention for human rights thing that liberal "democracies" always claim to be doing but never are.
"Both racial essentialism and radical behaviourism are wrong, therefore Hitler Khmer Rouge". Not necessarily completely wrong as such, but not particularly interesting either.
That is to say, those ideas (radical social constructivism and radical essentialism) were present in KR and nazi ideology, sure, but it's not like in either case the horrors of WWII or Cambodia just sprung up out of poor anthropology/biology. In neither case was this belief about humanity the primary cause, or even the 10th cause, of what happened there. I mean what, is he really saying that the primary cause of 20th century atrocities is what, not taking a balanced/nuanced view of the nature/nurture debate? If so, this quote is just an erudite way of saying a pretty stupid thing.
