Johnny Harris: A Story of YouTube Propaganda 

Edit: So, I think I jumped into nice mode the other day (as is my tendency) but, while I’d still like to keep things civil, I can’t help but feel there remain a lot of questions raised by this statement as well as some very convenient timing being involved which I think it would be worth clarifying. Again, I don’t wanna drag out the “drama” because that’s not what I’m about, but I do think it’s vital to ask questions about what I think most reasonable people would see as deeply unethical practices. So, if you’ve got a moment, would you mind clarifying: - How did you come into possession of an advance copy of Stakeholder Capitalism? Knowing how behind the times academic presses (such as Wiley & Sons) can be, it seems unlikely they’re sending out advance copies of books to RU-vidrs (especially ones who don’t review books and tend not to talk directly about the topics at hand). Was this the result of a previous relationship with the WEF? And, if so, was the book sent to you with the intention of encouraging a partnership on a video? - Why does an amended version of the script for the video appear on the WEF website as part of the Davos Agenda blogs? Yes, there are differences, but it’s essentially the same piece of writing beneath the surface. From the outside, this suggests a deeper relationship that them just agreeing to sponsor a video-those blog posts were an integral part of the public-facing wrap-around for the event. - In addition to this, why does the blogpost version of the video feature both yourself and Peter Vanham as authors of the piece? Yes, you draw heavily on his book in the video but the book is also written by Klaus Schwab and his name doesn’t appear on the blogpost. - Can you see how it might seem convenient that, as you describe it, you happened to approach the WEF out-of-the-blue asking if they wanted to sponsor a video at just the right time for it to launch alongside the Davos Agenda PR campaign, a campaign where they’ve specifically been looking to expand their reach on RU-vid in ways they haven’t before (ie. The Davos Daily with Lilly Singh). If, as you’ve now confirmed above, the video was paid for by the WEF, why did it not (at least the many times I watched it whilst researching this video) use the “Contains Paid Promotion” banner required by RU-vid’s terms of service and many countries by law. - Finally (and this one’s a bit of a broader question), do you regret being so outspoken about the state of contemporary journalism (going so far as to describe some outlets as so focussed on style over substance that they are “not journalism”)? I mostly agree with you there but I think, to most reasonable people, the idea of journalists being paid to promote a certain viewpoint uncritically is far more worrying than some outlets being a bit too entertaining? Sorry for not putting these points to you sooner (I guess this is why we need real journalists doing proper journalism rather than me having to muddle along and fill in!). Tagging you so you’ll hopefully see this: @Johnny Harris Thanks. Have a great weekend. Tom. Original Comment: Thanks Johnny. Appreciate you taking the time out to respond. I obviously still disagree with you on where that ethical line sits; I think journalists exist to ask challenging questions of organisations such as the WEF, not to partner with them on content. What that means with regard to journos/educators on RU-vid is perhaps hazier given how new this space is and the lack of institutional norms/ethical codes but I think people should remain deeply sceptical of any such work. That aside (as big a point as it may be), I respect your craft and enjoy your stuff. I’ll pin this as it only seems fair your response gets eyes on it. Hope you’re having a good week.

@@Tom_Nicholas my biggest critique of this whole discourse is that I haven’t heard someone engage with the actual content of my explanation. I spent loads of time sifting thru data and literature reviews of wonky journal papers to craft my understanding of income distribution over the past 35 years. I want a debate on THAT. The thrust of my argument. One that yes piggy backs off the work of a Swiss think tank but one that I nonetheless find compelling. I commend your work on unpacking the morphing realities of journalism on RU-vid but I worry that writing something off as propaganda based on who paid for it can serve as a weak proxy for actually engaging with evidence and arguments. Just another point to add to the discussion I suppose.

I hate American breakfast

@@johnnyharris in all fairness to Tom here, these are RU-vid comments and social media is probably not a great place to debate substantial points. I think the best approach may be simply to acknowledge differences, appreciate each other’s craft, and when the time comes, find another forum to have the substantial discussion on another forum like a joint interview, or Oxford Union, or a neutral think tank event.

Yeah, I was thinking about this when I was beginning to write the stuff about the Chinese Government towards the end of this video; the manner in which we tend to resist conceiving of it as propaganda because it's "our lot" not the "mischievous foreigners".

LoL as a Chinese, these are taught on our middle school classes...

The background radiation of US propaganda that its citizens are bathed in easily matches or exceeds the impact of state propaganda from Russia and the PRC, who are much more honest about what they're doing. Laundering the process through media corporations, PACs, think tanks, and other nonprofits was evil genius, since that extra step grants the US ruling class and their government the fig leaf of plausible deniability, using an absurd joint interpretation of the 1st and 14th amendments to frame this laundering as corporate "persons" using countless millions of USD to exercise their freedom of speech more effectively than any common individual possibly could. And many Americans are still dense enough to fall for the ruse when it's CNN or NPR doing it, despite easily recognizing that Al Jazeera is UAE propaganda, that RT is Russian propaganda, that China Daily is CPC propaganda, etc., etc. What's _even more_ troubling is their failure to recognize BBC and ABC as mouthpieces of the UK and Australian governments respectively despite having an almost one-to-one parallel with RT, because the other Anglo state media biases match those of CNN and NPR.

And that concept of propaganda is in itself because we have been propagandized about what propoganda is - and this is the part where governments *do* come into it because this is in part taught in schools in a variety of ways.

@@aj7058 When it's _them_ , it's misinformation and propaganda, When it's _us_ , it's "public relations management" and "winning hearts and minds".

I pay mind to the independent folk who get arrested for showing up to Davos

Jurnalistik on Harvest crime They wrote wht u r very intellect Rite today is the one of your friends have fun 😁❤️

All news is bias. diff is w/content creators on YT & the like, they don’t claim to be Unbiased and objective like corporate/status quo media. 😑

Johnny is a traditional journalist branding himself as independent.

Vox was created and funded by a mainstream media person Ezra Klein, of the Washington Post, and investors from mainstream media. These RU-vid channels are not as independent as they pretend. There is also the RU-vid management system.

That's the typical CIA operatives would say.

HIs "schtick" which is why the corpocrats love him, is that he can feign sincerity very well, and has the face for it.

😂😂

Nice little sell there

God I hate those ads so much just give me CCP propaganda lol

Come on...... Learn to recognise Big-Wizard and Chainmail Lobbiest propaganda when you see it.

😂😂😂😂

I mean, it's not even *do* the bare minimum, it's *say you're going to do* the bare minimum and then not actually do anything...

@@Tom_Nicholas It may be the case that the bare minimum truly is to simply provide lip service. A very convenient minimum when looking to safeguard profit, as it's quite cost effective.

@@Tom_Nicholas _We're listening, and We Care._ 🤗😳👹

Ah yes, I'm sure the people are on the brink of revolting and overthrowing capitalism. It's not like Marxists have been saying the exact same thing for over 150 years with it being less and less true as time goes by.

@@scarybird977 I mean, we are facing the worst societal and political crises since the 80’s Cold War tensions, so whilst revolts aren’t likely to happen on their own yet, it’s never been a better time to accelerate it for the benefit of a complete changeover.

He believes what puts the food on the table. He was already "vetted" by Vox (a shameless outlet for propaganda) and was seen as safe.

Perceptive.

He says they didn't write but his script is almost identical to a Davos agenda paper

@@Rays_Bad_Decisions Technically he is correct, his team (he has quite a few helpers) did the writing, we know what the inspiration drew from.

How dare those Europeans be more advanced than other cultures it must be some sort of plot by them and never would’ve happened had this far away thing not happened (trust me bro)

@@SyntaxErr19287 Medieval Europeans were more advanced than other cultures? I think even they will disagree with you. The medieval period around the world was a time of progress and prosperity, but definitely not so much in western Europe. May be another time period.

@@SyntaxErr19287 triggered ❄️

​@@SyntaxErr19287 anyone thinking Europe was some peaceful paradise in the medieval times is a brainwashed goon

@@nusaibahibraheem8183 That’s absolutely not true, it’s a common misconception from the vision of Europe you get from the mythos surrounding the “dark ages”. For all intents and purposes, Europe has dominated the planet since the fall of the Egyptian empire. Sorry that doesn’t sit well with you, but as a wise man who triggers you guys once said: Facts don’t care about your feelings.

Used to be a fan of Johnny too, started finding some things weird in his videos and the china one was the “breaking point”, it’s always good to question what you hear or read and think critically even about the things/people you like

He isnt handsome though

He is not handsome TO YOU...

This is so delightfully worded I legit chuckled.

We’ll always have Mark Cooper-Jones

This comment is only for the fellow bourgeoisie

@@davidsypnicki8085 🤣😂🤣

how do you do, fellow proles?

"Boy, I'm sure tired after... cutting meat for... 5 hours a day?"

World Economic Forum = bad people

greatest comment

Just unsubscribe to that clown.

Fr lol, he's still putting out misinformation and blatant lies despite his promises to cite his sources

Can we expect more from a pseudo-intellectual leftist? Lying is all they do, it is as necessary for them as breathing.

You had me in the first half...

Of course Harris is parroting capitalist propaganda, that's why he gets far more visibility than anyone who can think critically.

So it's not that he's objective you don't like. It's that he's not a communist AKA he's not mad

@@suleydaman 3you've never read shit about communism.

@@suleydaman imagine thinking ducking off the world economic forum after someone explained how they blame people for recessions isn't mad.

@@suleydaman all of Johnny’s videos are corporation apologia that frames neoliberalism as the best thing to ever happen to humanity. It’s uncritical propaganda that serves no purpose except to attract more sponsors in the future. He can’t even pretend to be a real journalist at this point

Yeah, just a really odd choice to do it.

@@Tom_Nicholas not really an odd choice, it was a choice in his own personal economic interest since he was paid to do it

Yeahhhh! I was a regular viewer up until then because that just seemed incredibly sketchy. Clearly that sponsorship either creates a conflict of interest or it means that he has a very specific pro-capitalistic goal that gave the WEF a reason to sponsor his propaganda.

Yeah I found that video so uninformative, it was literally just saying: capitalism good.

@@PeachesandCream225 Because genocidal regimes should be defended! Great sides we're picking here.

Yeah, the comments before it premiered were pretty evenly split between “I have no idea what this is gonna be about” and “I know exactly what this is gonna be about”.

It totally threw me for a loop because I was not expecting that kind of content from him! I skipped that video but have continued to be a mostly regular viewer since... I'm conflicted though.

I was thinking also about the Navalnyi where he almost wets his pants talking about Navalnyi 🤣 Some days later even amnesty international recognized his speech as HATEFUL 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

You joking? China got so powerful BECAUSE Deng's liberal reforms made it capitalist.

@@keylupveintisiete7552 why would anyone give a crap about what Amnesty International considers to be "hateful"?

Harris: Trust me because I say America's past wars were bad, but these next wars? They're great!! The dude's defense of Navalny(who has compared muslims to cockroaches and cavities and said you should commit violence against them) instantly set off alarms in my head. Navalny has like 2% support in Russia and espouses such beliefs yet John follows the US' example and paints him as this righteous crusader for democracy

@@MB2.0 You should live in a Muslim Majority neighborhood in a developing country, and that will fix a lot of your issues.

@@MB2.0 lots of politicians have a dark background. And he is the crusader for democracy. At least in Russia. This guy has exposed dozens of corruption schemes that the country is built on and went to jail just because of that. What's wrong with defending him?

@@axx8710 But few of them are literal n**zis. What's wrong with him is that he's a n**zi(this alone exposes that he's not interested in democracy) Western puppet with nearly non existent approval, trying to hand over Russian resources to people that have been trying to colonize it for centuries. But somehow according to Johnny Harris he's the guy that Russia so badly needs.

@@MB2.0 lmao it makes sense now. The problem with Navalny critics is they're dumb and are only capable of labeling him "nazi", "western puppet", "fifth colony" and etc. How is he a nazi? All Navalny wanted is to end corruption in this government.

Are they still doing that thing where they get impoverished babies reliant on their formula milk so that the parents have to buy it?

@@Tom_Nicholas well I think we are about due for a reboot on that. It will be like stranger things, only more existentially terrifying.

You should see what the Supreme Court has ruled for Nestle. They just ruled that people who claim to have been ENSLAVED by Nestle cannot sue them, and bring them to court. Nestle has always, and will continue to be the bad guy. They may not be getting babies addicted to their baby formula, but they‘ll probably never have to face the consequences of their immoral actions

@@Tom_Nicholas yes, they're still doing it in many countries, just not as directly as before. In 2018, the US government was pushing its weight to block a breastfeeding resolution, they continue to heavily push the idea that formula is equivalent in the Global South, and they are subsidized by WIC government funding in the US. www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2018/07/the-epic-battle-between-breast-milk-and-infant-formula-companies/564782/

Nestle - "water isn't a human right"

Bilderberg: ditto, but with no such pretence...

Forum of hypocrites.

Hypocrites or scam artists? I really hope nobody falls for their crap.

Not entirely the case. Think what they were getting at is a stakeholder is anyone affected by a company and it’s decisions (so employee, environment, consumers, shareholders etc) whereas shareholder only counts those who have actual shares in the company.

@@alphaglass6205 that is literally a definition that came into existence in the last 5 years, it was never defined in that manner at any other point in history. It is billionaires trying to rewrite the definition just so they can use it in a convoluted way.

@@ShionWinkler I mean, it's not exactly convoluted. People might talk about how they have a "stake" in something without it meaning they personally own stock in it. Plenty of writers use the expression "high stakes". I feel like saying the terms never been about people being affected is kinda overstating things.

@@ShionWinkler I was writing school reports about stakeholders a good 20 years ago. Just because you've only just heard of something doesn't make it new

@@ShionWinkler gonna have to disagree with you there. Maybe that's the case in your region of the world but when I was getting my diploma, we were taught there was a distinction between shareholders/ stakeholders. Stakeholder - someone who has an explicit interest in the performance of a company but not necessarily a financial interest (think employees, business partners, local community) Shareholder - someone who holds shares (investments) in the company. I think the reason they have been used interchangeably is because Shareholders are Stakeholders in a business but the reverse isn't always true.

If they come out of nowhere and have millions of views, they are being casually pushed on you. I always knew there was something off about him for that reason.

Most independent social/political content is suppressed by the algorithm, unless it's the propaganda they want you to see.

@@Jay-gf8tm worst take ever.

@@yungaj6166 sure zoomer

@@yungaj6166 eh they're kinda right tbh. its not a guarantee, there are leftist youtubers that have a big audience but it is true as a tendency

Agreed

Including on this video.

Agree. See Tom Nicholas and how he covers topics. Read: who he chooses (hits), cherry picked facts(narrative to drive), lack of perspective(there's more perspectives?) and bizarre conclusions (if you're a tune to his intentional whiffs on the first 3) he draws.

Read instead of getting information spoonfed. Also, do not trust a pretty face to tell you what to think. Yes, I think he is a handsome looking fella.

bottom line: analyze everything. form your own opinions.

Omg the 2 smart kids in class arguing

I cannot imagine this video will get quite that much traction, but I would be totally up for a non-confrontational chat where we talk it through a bit, haha! (Although I can imagine there was possibly (not saying definitely) some form of NDA involved).

@@insidethebox2470 lmfao, Harris isn't very intelligent

He's not going to respond just as he won't update anything about the case of navalnyi where he was fangirling so hard on him when hes even called "russian trump" for his ultra-nationalist anti-immigrant pro gun views that please the us overlords

@@Tom_Nicholas Harris may have signed a type of non-disclosure agreement with WEF

Same on my end.

he definitely open my eyes to some of his questionable videos but harris videos be so interesting to watch just for the fukk of it

Dude, this Tom Nicholas guy is just playing the same game. He isn't saying anything profound, or even particularly groundbreaking, but he does use dramatic pauses, and pacing in his delivery, to make it sound like he is. The likes of Harris and Veritasium could be sincere in their enthusiasm for their chosen sponsors, but they're too big a trophy for this cat to pass up. Johnny got his Nord money, and Tom got his Surfshark money, but in the economy of clicks, you watched 'em both, and that's all that matters.

@@chuck1804 Dude, Did you even watch this video?? Not the same game at all. Nicholas advertised a service, in this case Surfshark, but he WROTE the entire content in the video. Harris DID NOT write his China video, Peter Van Ham did (WEF's public relations spokesperson). Harris' name appears in the credits subordinate to VanHam's and we only find that out if we go to the WEF website. Harris' HANDED OVER HIS CREATE CONTROL- that is not simple endorsement of a product. WEF is not selling a product, it is selling propaganda and Harris let himself be used. Harris himself was very angry about this video because what Nicholas shows that his voice is for sale and that draws his journalistic integrity into question, regardless of whether he actually believes what the WEF is selling or not. Harris states he wrote the video so why did Van Ham get (WEF) top billing for the creation of the video?? Someone isn't telling the truth, and I don't think it's Nicholas.

He is diligent indeed - in acting as a cog in warmongering anti-China propaganda machine. His videos about China are embarrassing...

This is a strange comment. He is not just being sponsored by the World Economic Forum, he is parroting their propaganda as it if is his thoughts. Your comments only make sense if only are a fan of the WEF.

Yall go to china and see black people with chinese wifes and children eating outside of the restaurant while his wife and kid can eat inside, you better open your mouth about China when you know what the fuck is going on in that socialist shithole

@GN M Blaming is pointless, actions should be taken, but if theres someone to blame for chaos and massive support for softening the western society ( creating more and more mass confusion, clearly unnoticed yet ) that is China and all of its associates

@@hockeyisagame5044 Instead of revealing your racism, you should direct you big brain to learning that China is as capitalist as they come.

@@lindahlophe1572 I am by no means racist, go visit a less touristic area of China and convince yourself? How am I even racist by spitting facts? Huh

Yeah, I know, right? Although I'm sure they benefit in some ways from being able to tie anyone who criticises it in with the fringe conspiracy folk.

@@Tom_Nicholas So much this! it makes people turn off from genuine alerts which are not cheerful. If you felt like tackling the role of behavioural science or other techniques used on the populace it would be grand. Thank you for this vid it were ace.

@@Tom_Nicholas It sure works for Bill Gates.

@@camelopardalis84 I wish the parts of the Bill Gates conversation that are critical of the guy and his brand would focus more on the legitimate issues like being able to enforce an inexpert opinion on global health policy direction through the withholding of funds (such as advocating for eradication of one specific disease at the expense of doing public health work on a raft of more dangerous concerns), rather than vaguely gesturing towards tracking, privacy and the Jews

@@TAP7a I agree completely and am aware of the issue you raise. Didn't know about the "the Jews" part, though. And I am completely serious when I say that Gates must be so glad that there are so many nonsense conspiracy theories he's at least an important part of. If I were kidnapping neighbourhood cats to keep them in the attic of my mansion, I sure would be pleased to have people who accuse me of being a literal witch due to me wearing a weird pointy hat, so I could point to people who rightfully accuse me of kidnapping cats and say "Look at these accusations again! These dumb-dumbs accuse me of being a witch who eats cats!"

Yeah, we're going to dig into that...

that video was the one where i was like.... who is this guy? what am i watching?

I had to unsubscribe after that.

The one against Russia had the same vibe but more discreet

@@SomeDudeQC I will unsub him now.

Or at the very least when they have the decency to disclose it at the beginning, not push it off to the very end.

No, it's propaganda is wanting you to think it's any good

And definitely will be more skeptical about the product presented by RU-vidr.

@@MariaThePotterNut that is just marketing. propaganda is inherently political.

@Shea Martin raid shadow legends is just a cash grab game, good business model bad game

Yeah, I found the whole thing a bit odd on first watching it. The decision to make this video mostly came from a place of real disappointment; I've really enjoyed so much of Harris' work (and having an excuse to go and rewatch old episodes of Borders and his solo videos in order to write this was a real joy).

@@Tom_Nicholas Yeah I had the same thing - thought his videos were decent, and then thought that video took a really weird turn, glad you made a video on it so quickly

I don't care about the Davos crowd, their nefarious plans and propaganda. As a theoretical concept, stakeholder ownership, which associates with blockchain and proof-of-stake algorithms for block solving, is somewhat interesting. First, capitalism is perfectly well defined as ownership by shareholders under centralized bureaucracy and territorial monopoly of violence controlled by the centralized bureaucracy. What might stakeholder ownership in post-capitalist system be like? For libertarian socialism, collective ownership whether formal (e.g. co-ops) or informal (commons) is by definition decentralized ownership based on use and occupancy, and without absentee abusus aka "private" ownership like shares. A possible interpretation and use of 'stake' in libertarian socialist models could start from stake of voting tokens in tokenized blockchain based co-ops, for example how a global UBI system co-op style could start imagining and organizing its self-governance model(s). UBI co-op where "money", ie tokens for variety of uses, would be created directly as gifts for the owners, ie. co-op members. Ie., what could be the technical meaning of stake, when money creation and distribution is socially owned?

You joking? China got so powerful BECAUSE Deng's liberal reforms made it capitalist.

@Tom Nicholas Sorry but the intent to justify your add is disingenuous to say the least. Who's paying for your video? Surfshark. The main purpose of your video is to sell us "Surfshark". When TV channels (even the public ones) make an add placement for Coca-Cola or Hasbro in the middle of a show, who's in charge of the show? The capital behind it. You may agree with Coca-Cola and try to defend it, but it doesn't change the nature of the relationship. And yes, I get it, this is capitalism and we all need to eat, but it's also true you could fully finance your channel via Patron like many others do. It's a pity because your argument loses so much power against Harris. A small add like yours it's OK, but a big one is not. Cheers and thanks for the videos.

Well, "to be fair" the Oligarchy knows that not every body is enchanted with "most media outlets" and yet the Oligarchy wants to reach those people with its synchronized message. That's where Johnny Mouthpiece comes in to play.

same

He believes in it.

What is more alarming is the number of people who consider Schwab and co. to be capitalists rather than communists wearing a cloak. "Stakeholder Capitalism" isn't capitalism at all!

Money, plain and simple!

@@Radeo What utter nonsense. WEF is the epitome of capitalism.

​@@XMysticHerox Perhaps the poster above meant 'communism as observed in real life' rather than 'communism as written on paper', alas. Being from a former communist country, there's definitely some merit to that, but I think it's ultimately a pointless distinction once you get into the reality of elites - it doesn't matter if they spout platitudes about the free market or about diveristy and equality, it's all just a cover that they believe is the best way to covertly reach their goal (and make you believe it's what you wanted), which is simply to hold all the power. They corrupted capitalism (as you can see now) exactly like they corrupted communism (as you can see historically), all to keep power in a small closed circle. And the more powerful the government, the easier that is.

I hope people see it as the scam it really is. Global Elites promoting public ownership? I am not a fool.

ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-Dum0bqWfiGw.html

your country is sadly a place where all the rich corrupt people of the world store all of their wealth. your position as a neutral country is in fact a very dangerous and weak policy.

@@LevisH21 You dont know anything about his country, watching vox doesn't mean anything. Its really not as bad as you have been led to believe

@@dopaminedreams1122 not bad for the average Swiss citizen, maybe but the people that have their money stolen from corrupt countries around the world have their stolen money hidden in secret bank accounts by corrupt politicians.

What was the video?

This is less about *what* was said (although I do spend a decent amount of time on that) than *why* it was said...

@@Tom_Nicholas Ah, okay, very interesting. I haven't watched the video yet. I'm looking forward to it.

@@Tom_Nicholas Having watched it now, and knowing that Johnny's video on Cuba was made for Vox, I now wonder how VOX is funded.

@@jonesmartins advertising, it's a pretty big media conglomerate.

@@AgusSimoncelli Every big media company is funded by advertising, right? I'm talking about specific think tanks, lobbying companies, etc.

You're not wrong.

Johnny video literally said oh corporations created the problems, its fine they'll take care of it, while being sponsored by the same

Damn right!✊

i call that socialism but you do you.

@@chagoriver7159 That is a better term for it yes

That's an interesting question because I don't know whether those laws only apply to selling products or services. Whilst there's shout out for the book, there's not really anything in particular being sold here. But there's not been the "Contains ads" or whatever flag anytime I've watched it and I watched it a whole bunch whilst making this video.

@@Tom_Nicholas Yes if he received ANYTHING of value which doesn't even have to be monetary (ie. free travel) it is a crime. In the US it needs to be clearly stated that they are a sponsor and marked as such.

@@excitedbox5705 does this apply to NGOs? Like if the WEF technically doesn't make a profit, does the law still stand?

@@james_chatman disclosures by law have to be clearly laid out to viewers (ex. in the video title or at the beginning of the video), or it is a violation of the rules regarding sponsorships. seeing how he squirreled the disclosure away just before the end of the video, lots of folks watched the bulk of the video but left before the disclosure. if it isn't currently illegal, it's incredibly unethical and ought to be illegal.

@@daddishowkey The law stands for everybody. No exceptions. However, I have no idea if it is legal or illegal

Real recognise real

Fancy seeing you here doc!

Hi doc👋🏼

I wish I could have your opinion on every video about important topics that I watch 😅

Thank you! Haha, if we ever go on a holiday that involves a plane, I always tell my partner (who's a doctor) about your incredible luck with having medical emergencies on flights. I don't think she appreciates it very much...

As a Chinese person, watching those videos often makes me question if I am living in a different universe called "China." It's both amusing and perplexing. 😂 作为一个中国人，看他的视频往往会怀疑自己是不是生活在另外一个宇宙的“中国”。 啼笑皆非。

I saw the McDonald's icecream one. It was 5min of content stretched over 30min of "storytelling". I got about 10min in before I realised he was never actually going to get to the point. Haven't been able to stomach anything with his face on since.

Does he have real talent for making interesting videos...? Or does he have the ability to fund & manage a team that otherwise brings together interesting videos on engaging topics...? Also, I agree - his language learning video falls flat as a blatant advert for his language learning course.

the dude is full blown woke while pretending to defend the poor yet ironically makes millions, eats avocado toast, and drinks fancy artisan ice cream like Pelosi lol. Similar to the woke hipster tech folks in SF that no longer show up to the office to contend to the walking dead homeless there lol

@@mabamabam I swear it's just so punchable. You could see through his slyness just watching a few videos.

Harris is a scammer…can’t stand this clown

This dude ain’t one bit better. Explaining the WEF like it’s just some evil rich dudes ruining the world while pretending to want to do something. Some may actually not want to change but why do we always have to assume the worst in people?

Yes, I've seen this as well. When you keep this kind of thing in mind and go back to his videos it becomes very clear. Not to mention the inappropriate ommition of important information he does.

You don't even know the definition of propaganda...using logic/facts to support an argument is not "propaganda" just because you disregard data that does not support your point. That is just having bias. With your logic, everything is propaganda including your comment.

The amount of cynicism and hypocrisy in this video would amaze me if I wasn't used to leftists but very nice to see two leftist sc. ms eating each other. It's very enjoyable to see that they believe exactly the same thing but this round guy attacks the other to prove he's more communist and truly believes that B's. Looks like an internal dispute in the communist party in the USSR. "You're not commie enough". 👏🏻🤡🥳😂💩😂🤪

Use the stones to destroy the stones.

Faster, stronger, more resilient capitalism.

Put different types of capitalism in hadron colliders and keep the only surviving one. Send it back to political scientists to study and make stronger, bigger forms of capitalism.

Actually, probably, yes

@@l.pietrobon3925 Imagine if we have advanced computers to test out more efficient and profitable strains of capitalism.

he has his own hidden agenda and sometimes it's too obvious. and sometimes I feel his confirmation bias is too strong he research in order to conform his opinions...

@Lukas Prochazka tru but it’s kind of impossible to not have bias as a human. I like Tom because he’s open about this bias and doesn’t pretend to be “neutral”(whatever that means), but critical and methodical

@@kofi9212 He says the World Economic Forum isn't involved in a conspiracy. But he has no evidence. Conspiracies aren't meant to be easily uncovered. Corporations are currently overhauling society without most of the public's knowledge.

@@tuckerbugeater one reason WEF is not involved in a conspiracy is because it doesn't need to be, and this is usually why many supposed conspiracies are actually nonexistent. No actual conspiracy could have more influence than the WEF has in its current form. Likewise, you don't need a conspiracy to turn billions of people into Facebook or videogame playing morons (talking about the addicts who have no life except play violent video games). People sign up to that shit willingly, with all the cards on the table, no-one's deceiving or forcing them.

Sis was drag by her thin receding hairline

Oh the microchipping video is from 2017, where he’s speaking with some google CEO.

He definitely did that on purpose haha. Draws a lot of clicks.

Huh. I was dismissing the video for two days thinking it's Johnny's. :)

Haha.

Haha.

Haha.

Haha.

Only if the gun in cuestion shoots cash

Owning up to mistakes you make is a big part of becoming better... sadly seems Harris isn't too interested in that...

His astrophotography video about photographing a galaxy is the same way. It is the one that jumps out to me as I have quite a bit of experience with the topic. He tells a great story but it's clearly pushed to the max and very misleading. He leaves out a lot of the process to make it seem a lot harder than it is. His videos are so well produced but I'm now seeing there is a lot beneath the surface

​@@KnowledgePerformance7 Honest question, how exactly is it misleading? I watched that video a month or so ago, but if I recall correctly, one of the driving points of the video was how incredibly difficult it was to gain this skill. Isn't that the whole point of the "foggy valley" analogy? The video wasn't a tutorial, it was an exploration his new hobby.

@@kcwidman I like his analogy, I just think the story is blown way out of proportion. Now there isn't necessarily a problem with that, it makes for better story telling, but it felt kinda wrong to me? Not sure how to nail how I feel about it.

@@KnowledgePerformance7 Kurzgesagt made an excellent video about that

and now he works at NYT

@@CarloBarlongo mainstream media???🤢🤮🤢🤮🤢🤮🤢🤮🤢🤮🤢🤮🤢🤮🤢🤮🤢🤮🤢🤮🤢🤮🤢🤮🤢🤮🤢🤮🤢🤮🤢🤮🤢🤮🤢🤮🤢🤮🤢🤮🤢🤮🤢🤮

Now we need someone keeping this guy honest

Our good sis Harris was dragged by her thin receding hairline, we love yt on yt crimez. Yet sooo civil but yet sooo Savage

He's not an independent journalist (anymore).

Yeah, this happens occasionally in print media and it's bad there too. It's much less common though and the statements of corporate/government involvement are much more present.

Shoutout to Halim Alrah's manufacturing consent video (I assume everyond here knows of Tom's)

You said "perfectly reputable newspapers" which is a framing people need to change. Those papers fofeited their good reputations & trustworthiness some time ago. A lot of our difficulities come from people continuing to pretend or ignore. We have to move on & find solutions or we're effed!

@@kenechiachusiogu1717 yeah same here

@ᴡɪɴᴛᴇʀᴍᴜᴛᴇ _ It's true parasocial relationships are a concern, especially with the likes of Musk, as you say, however I think this is rather mean of you & overreaching, using first name does not always imply that there's an over identification with a stranger. Maybe take the cork out of your arse fella. Have a nice weekend.

And yet they make fun of socialists who say 'it wasn't real communism'

Except capitalism usually creates a few outrageously rich people, who can then buy off the government. The whole system tends towards oligarchy.

...I mean, can you think of any democracy in which rich people don't have more pull than regular people? Maybe there is one?

@@grmpEqweer isn’t Cuba democratic?

@@xenoblad Not even close. It's an authoritarian one-party state that greatly restricts freedoms and civil liberties and kills dissidents.

I can't quite imagine this video getting enough views for that to happen. Would love to do a little interview though, haha!

@@Tom_Nicholas Oh i'm sure he keeps enough of an eye on his analytics to see when his name is mentioned

@@Tom_Nicholas bumping up the algorithm for you bro, you make great content

@@Tom_Nicholas liking and subscribing to your channel for better traction

Interestingly enough, he's replied in a pinned comment to this video already.

Stakeholder capitalism sounds like actual fascism.

Stakeholder capitalism is the same as crony capitalism and corporatism. Just a deflection to take peoples minds of the fact that its all just capitalism. "No, capitalism can't be wrong! It's the people who implemented it in some wrong way!".

This!!!

Doesn’t matter about “human rights reform” because globalist corporations will be the ones to decide what the reforms are.

@@chriswhite3692 stakeholder capitalism is fascism…and cementing neo-feudalism.

@@pirateKaiser True. He's one of the few channels I'm subbed with notifications, and I still don't get them properly.

Have you seen how hard the algorithm pushes you into a pit of propaganda just by watching a certain type of content? Watch videos about guns, and soon enough right-wing lunatics are gonna be yelling about Kamala Harris the communist coming to take your toothbrush away.

Reason why The Grayzone and Empire Files won't show up in your recommendations.

@@pirateKaiser Sometimes you can't even find his videos when you search for the title I prefer to watch it on Nebula because that at least gets the poor guy paid for his work He has also had people from the US government show up at his door apparently, which is just scary

You think RU-vid, Twitter, Instagram and Google are pro capitalism? The platforms that are literally pushing antifa and blocking anyone who complains?

🤣

@T Wilson the problem isn't with the idea itself, but the fact that a organisation closely linked to the super wealthy is advocating for it. This gives the impression that no real change will occur other than a "re-branding" that does nothing to fix the issues that exist

How does it work, if you can do an ELI5 of it? All my versions of it work out as either: * You get (tiny) shares in a company in lieu of money * Company becomes owned by its worker * State, counter, town etc owns (or enough shares to decide policy of) any company where the population has an interest.

Same I did a bachelors in accounting. I was like "Wait what?"

@BTAX So they spent a significant amount of time brainwashing students into believing Socialism was a better form of Capitalism just using another name? Great...

@@vincentmuyo Marx had the idea that shareholder capitalism would work out like stakeholder capitalism, and was a path to true worker-owner socialism. There's nothing that prevents the wealthy from accumulating the majority of shares the same way they accumulate them now, and that's precisely why stakeholder capitalism is just a nice theory. As long as workers lack the capital to reinvest, they can never own a collective majority of their own companies. Co-ops and worker owned companies in general usually start out that way, so that outside investors don't have the opportunity to buy it out from under them. Then again that's also why there are so few of them. Even Mondragon Corp now has facilities in China, do those workers own those facilities? I can't find anything on Mondragon's site that proves one way or the other, but it seems like it would be a shady legal arrangement if they did. China's not fond of foreign ownership of their stuff.

I mean, I don't think putting that bit at the end was a mistake...

@@Tom_Nicholas Yeah no, I don't think it was a mistake either. I'm just a bit shocked and pissed I guess.

@@Tom_Nicholas I'm not sure how to interpret this. Mistake as "unintentional", or mistake as "a bad thing to do"? I guess it's probably the former.

@@NawidN did your parents teach you that a mistake was a bad thing to do? It's ok to make mistakes.

@@Tom_Nicholas It's not, it's what gives videos views on RU-vid. You should know, as a creator here, that RU-vid specifically provides data that proves videos lose viewers if ads are placed at the beginning. It's the reason you did a one frame shout out to Surfshark (or whatever it was) at the beginning and didn't run the ad until later.

The algorithm (and I) thank you!

Bump bump it up!!

Indeed and yet they still manage to pool half a billion US dollars annually into this lobbying group to resist meaningful change from the public. Most businesses call this an outlay, they're not pumping this money into this advocacy if did it didn't leave them at least a penny better off and they're not in it for the pennies.

@@giansideros 100%

ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-Dum0bqWfiGw.html

God this video pisses me off it's so disingenuous.

I disagree with Johnny w.r.t. The Great Reset. They plan to change things radically.

RU-vid is blocking most criticism of the WEF.

Throughout history, the instances of truly unbiased journalism are few and far between. There is always an agenda in the mind of the supposed journalist. This is more evident today than any time I can recall in the last 50 years. However, it is certainly not new. One need only review newspaper articles going back to the beginning of the printing press. There is a part of me that almost admires the ability of two opposing views to use actual facts to promote an agenda and 'prove' their opposition wrong. To me, Johnny Harris and Tom Nichols are two sides of the same coin. I don't believe either is a liar, nor do I believe they are not sincere in their respective beliefs. They have opinions which are largely subjective and are each accomplished wordsmiths in presenting those opinions to influence others into their way of thinking. However, in concert with that, they both utilize forums that exist solely through money and the ability to generate money to keep it going.

I say the cable news of the pre-social media era was pretty unbiased.

@@foscorsohil8940 you mean the news that told you capitalism good communism bad?

@@vuvuzela691 there was no such news. News used to be pretty boring in those times, thus less manipulated.

It better shows that people aren’t perfect and won’t agree with you all the time. It’s better to enjoy your favs with a pinch of salt

You love his propaganda channel? Ok

@@dann7411 pls stfu

Ya brother same here I also though some hateful video it will be but said so much good points

TBH I was expecting a salty hate piece also, but I have to admit I was a little unsettled by the WEF video too. Halfway through this video and can't help but feel it's reasonably on point so far.

lol the irony… Hasan is far worse in his misinformation than Harris is

Yeah, I thought the weird feeling I got from that video was an ideological disconnect, but I guess it was a bit more than that. I saw the part about the WEF sponsorship, but I guess it never really sank in. Sucks too, because Johnny Harris is one of my handful of favorite creators on the platform..

what about the cuba video? another video he blamed socialism and was pro capitalism

Fuc socialism lol no country uses it

To be honest, China cannot be consider Socialist or communist in any form now, it is hybrid

@@simulify8726 Hardly hybrid-it's authoritarian/state capitalist. If the working class doesn't have democratic control of the means of production (which they don't), it's neither socialist or communist.

The book is really expensive (I would assume due to a pretty small print run) and my guess is that's a result of its publication being more about being able to say "there's a whole book about this" to make it sound like a substantial idea rather actually wanting anyone to read the book.

Well, that's kind of the point I guess.

China is evil

Yeah, I really like a whole bunch of his stuff, but this was just eeeeeesh. I'm trying to square it by putting it down to naivety...

Also, when he mention Milton Friedman just to praise him, that was a red flag for me, I feel like every time people bring Friedman they should also mention the role he played during the Reagan administration and what he did in Chile. That guy has blood in his hands

Capitalism is infinitely more ethical than the alternatives.

@@Deathmastertx i bet you couldn’t describe the alternative even i press you to do it

@@Deathmastertx idk im pretty sure the system that is leading to total ecological collapse isnt the most ethical one of all the potential options.

I commented on a verified youtuber's comment, im famous now

You seem very intellectually honest. Subbed.

hello jj mccullough. You should visit Alaska, and make a video about it.

@@jens1567 he also makes good content

Haha it's so nice to see you here JJ!

Whats he said??? I thought his content was alright, but not someone I’d keep going to watch

@ᴡɪɴᴛᴇʀᴍᴜᴛᴇ _ that's pretty much the exact opposite of what's wrong with the idea of "stakeholder capitalism"

@ᴡɪɴᴛᴇʀᴍᴜᴛᴇ _ aren't we already living in chaos and misery lol

@ᴡɪɴᴛᴇʀᴍᴜᴛᴇ _ The only reason you have the freedoms in that finite time is because of hard fought battles by all of us. And that gives us the sense of purpose to make the most of our times.

@ᴡɪɴᴛᴇʀᴍᴜᴛᴇ _ "I've been to 4chan", I suspected as much. Your comments read like edgy rants.