I hate the blame game too my guy. Like I'm in jail for life for "killing my wife" and "first-degree murder." The judge just blamed me even though I told him " your honor she had it coming." He didn't understand what lead to her deserving it.
I assaulted and tried to steal from someone and they fought back! I even gave them a deal where I just take a little and then I'll stop. Can you believe they didn't take the deal? Now it's all "you started it!" 🙄 blame game.
@@corranhorn85 Yeah, but maybe if I establish more frameworks, it'll work this time. Surely my violent attacker wouldn't dare sully his reputation in the eyes of the general public.
"You shouldn't be allowed to topple your government." Literally one of the only statements that both the left and the right would agree is fucking stupid.
@@ManticTRIGGER yeah that is the only difference between them when it comes to being ok with revolting against your government. The left agrees if a government is doing you harm and going against your best interests then its based to revolt against them, but if youre revolting cause you lost a democratic election and are booty hurt that your guy didnt win then thats a pointless revolution.
To be fair, you _aren't_ allowed to topple your government. It's just that, if you succeed, the people who would've punished you can no longer do so. Like how cheating in cards is allowed as long as you're never caught.
@@kneau "Your honor, it's very immature that jury and witnesses ganged up on my client. We should follow the FrAMewORk of diplomacy and all get along."
We need paper work to prove this happened so in 50 years after the apocalypse they can find those papers in the destroyed UN building and understand why the world ended.
“I’m a libertarian” “So you see, in a democratic government you gently wait for when elections are about to come, you shouldn’t be able to protest” So not only that, but in the end it’s “well you’re not a libertarian because you think voting someone means the majority is for that!”
Somehow they all do. There's so much imaginary "voluntary union of like minded people" that one could almost think that they see the world of governance exactly as it has become. In other words; we currently live in the Libertarian utopia they advocate for, and they hate it.
God this guy argues so disingenuously it’s amazing. He honestly compared invading another country to annex its territory to a country protecting its territorial integrity within its own country
And when Vaush asked him anout existing international laws and UN resolutions, he changed the subject to Ukraine killing someone in an extraordinarily obvious pivot to avoid the question.
The fact Vaush is playing a rougelike, a genre defined by constant restarts and unending adventure in the exact same path continually, well having this debate is more irony then my puny form can handle
Classic Dunning-Krugerism. Had that same energy of a 5th grader writing an essay about how they would bring about world peace or a teenager proudly "inventing" Objectivism.
He really did seem to be talking down to Vaush multiple times, while being so obtuse. Either because he's genuinely cognitively or mentally deficient, or a dishonest coward.
Admits France and Germany have been trying diplomacy for years. Proceeds to decry that there would be no war, if only people had tried diplomacy. Claims that we need frameworks for peace. Ignores that we already have frameworks: the UN, international law, the Geneva Convention and that Putin doesn't give a shit about them. Maybe he just just wants crypto frameworks that are better because something something blockchain?
Also insists that the making a deal with Russia that Russia would break would turn Russian citizens against the government, asking why the government is being such assholes. The whole thing is a barely-examined thought experiment with demonstrably false underlying premises.
I also just didn't get this idea of like If the Russian government breaks it International contract the people will turn against them. we literally have an example of this happening the German people did not rise up against Hitler after he broke the Munich agreement and invaded Czechoslovakia. The government just lies.
@@Noschool100 You have failed to consider that Hitler would have been obligated to justify his actions if only the Munich agreements had been broadcasted on TV.
This whole framework sh*t is just this guy saying "my solution to the diplomacy problem is that people should find a solution to the problem" in a pseudo-intelecual way
A framework in programming is a set of rules the computer *has* to abide by. He's a techbro Musk fan, and they have a real lovely habit of thinking every solution to everything lies in programming, or Elon Musk.
@@roberteriksen6434 I wonder how well it would have worked if Vaush had offered to let him set up a framework for the debalte, then completely ignored it for the entirety of the conversation.
If only we decentralized peace talks by establishing frameworks on the block chain I don't know what any of that means, but I hope ti makes me sound smart
Every single person who debates about this saying "well, maybe we should just let Russia have any territory they decide is theirs, war is bad and maybe if we just surrender land it will be over" would have handed over the Sudetenland to Hitler and as a 3rd generation american of polish origins I have a pretty big problem with that argument.
Same. If'n a few years America finds itself in that same grip, then I hope the rest of the world doesn't just let us annex Quebec, or whatever stupid shit we try.
Isn't handing over the Sudetenland with no real action basically what the western powers did? Munich Agreement and all. Munich Betrayal, if you're czech.
As a Belgian, I agree. I am not a big fan of war by any means, but I do prefer the (neoliberal helscape of a) world we have today over whatever nazi Germany mightve planned to do to our little mess of a country.
True peace is not merely the absence of tension: it is the presence of justice. So in my mind there can only be peace for Ukraine when there is first justice for Ukraine.
This dude is all four points of the political compass at the same time and it's both completely incomprehensible and exhausting to listen to while also making me wish I could strangle someone through the internet. In Roblox.
Imagine this guy watching someone get mugged. The victim is beat on and has their wallet stolen, and the mugger is demanding their phone with a knife, but when the victim pulls a gun and demands his wallet back, this guy jumps in like “WOAH WOAH, hasn’t enough damage been done? We can figure out a way to peace without stealing your wallet back.”
Vaush should have asked this dude what „systems” he worked on, because I don’t trust a single bit in any of them. One shouldn’t be allowed to call yourself the „idea guy” if all their ideas are garbage.
"She didn't hit me, we got into an confrontation after she had a bad day at work and 3 bottles of vodka, dinner wasn't ready when it was originally promised to be, I didn't have the money for her dealer, and we we're still working through the conflict in a way that works for us."
I think I know where you lost interest: right around "when you say Ukraine wants to defend itself" then tried to say the nation of Ukraine wasn't really interested in remaining a sovereign nation because no one likes to be conscripted. I guess people love being invaded?
This guy straight up didn't get that the final consequence of broken treaties is just Death. It's an unfortunate reality, but people have to die when they'd rather burn the table and spit the ashes in your face than sit at it
One reason the US was so set on unconditional surrender of Japan was because the Japanese had already demonstrated a willingness to negotiate in bad faith when they had the US in negotiations right up until just before launching the attack on Pearl Harbor. The US could no longer trust Japan to abide by the terms of any treaty or armistice short of unconditional surrender.
Sitting at a table and talking it out means nothing if one side is not operating in good faith. Japan did this in WW2. They were in the middle of diplomatic talks with the US as a delaying tactic while they moved their fleet against Hawaii. Then they abruptly ended those diplomatic talks and launched a surprise attack on the US Pacific fleet. No amount of meetings or zoom calls would have stopped Russia from invading Ukraine unless the result of those talks was giving Russia everything they wanted.
Yeah it was by far the most naive viewpoint I've ever heard. The idea that if we just tried diplomacy a little bit more (as if they didn't try) then everything could have been avoided and could solve all problems across the world, is mind numbingly juvenile. Saying if Putin didn't pull out of Ukraine after claiming he would, would then have to explain that to his people (like he gives a shit) means absolutely nothing to a dictator. He almost literally made it sound like Putin would get "cancelled" by his people or something. The reality is people would be pissed (as many are now) and nothing at all would change. I couldn't believe he kept unironically making this argument and could never answer what he would actually due in Putin just ignored everyone, like he's doing now.
He doesn’t even seem to care about that argument is the weird part, because he refuses to engage with questions about existing frameworks which Russia (and America) regularly ignore. He is either lying about believing in “frameworks,” or he knows he can’t defend his idea.
it was funny how even acknowledged international law doesnt work when he brought up the us pulling out of the paris accords and basically faced no consequences. international relations, specifically between nuclear powers, are anarchic, this is no governing body above nation states that could enter Russia and force them to follow international law.
@@Noschool100 It's also this assumption that autocratic leaders can be seen as a rational actor in the world. When a leader is only accountable to their own whims, these frameworks mean very little
@@XBotimusPrimeX He doesn't think Putin is an autocrat, it seems. He thinks Putin is as accountable to the people as someone who was legitimately elected. In fact, he seems to think Zelensky is more of an autocrat than Putin is.
"When treaties are multilaterally agreed upon, countries will abide by them" is the most insane foreign policy take ever. Countries won't even abide by bilateral treaties most of the time - where breaches have even more far-reaching consequences. Additionally, UN members are not obligated to sign treaties, even if they are agreed on in the UNGA. The U.S. hasn't even signed most of the Human Rights treaties. Read up on how international institutions work before coming up with 'solutions' like this, jeez.
This reminds me of conversations I had with my ex-girlfriend in which she argued that militaries should be dispersed, because there is always a diplomatic solution, often repeating the phrase 'Imagine it's war and no-one shows up', while I argued that all it takes is one actor, who doesn't care about diplomacy to destroy everything.
@Tight n Nerdy her idea would probably work if it wasn’t for men.. so it’s not really an own of a female but a man unable to comprehend men have been a plague on the earth
I'm entirely anti war. But I still accept the purpose of having a standing military. Smaller than what we have, but something that can set up and hold a robust and powerful defence. The idea that we shouldn't have something to defend with is just naive.
I appreciate vaush debating a neaderthal from thousands of years ago but I think debating people born in modern day would elicit more productive conversation
Gneursh think Big Water Tribe no need send sharp flints to Forest Floor Tribe for bashing of Fire Tribe. Fire Tribe big boss only need talk with Forest Floor Tribe big boss in front of tribe and explain why feel need to take over hunting ground and take Forest Floor Tribe women captive. Fire Tribe have few women? Need more food? Headbashing no lead to solution, Forest Floor Tribe should lay down bashing rocks to show good example to Fire Tribe. Gneursh know Gneursh big brain, thank all, thank all. Now Gneursh need go, must see if true that Dershkon of Muskrat Tribe release blue tweety bird from cage and no fly away from Dershkon.
"We can create frameworks for what to do in various scenarios. We need to get both sides to the table to talk." Holy shit, this guy just solved global war and achieved world peace! If only the UN had the foresight to invent frameworks and suggest warring parties talk to each other! I want to know what his solution to the homelessness crisis is. Will it be "Just buy a house"?
This is the perfect response. Seriously he thinks every world government just hasn’t put in the work to talk to the regime in Russia. That every government doesn’t have “frameworks” for how to try to diplomatically solve issues. Sorry man, but frameworks aren’t like software and are hard coded into the world. Putins regime was willing to pay the small cost they thought it would take to conquer Ukraine in a week. Miscalculated and can’t back down.
20 minutes in, this dude who claims to be "left libertarian" who is "critical of governments" is apparently against people toppling their own governments because "toppling governments" is bad but I just wonder if he would have the same energy if it was...let's say people of Taiwan storming their government who is favorable to US hegemony and hostile to populist action
When he said(while discussing an authoritarian superpower invading a sovereign democratic country) "I don't like the blame game" I think I had a mini stroke.
Its amazing when someone tries to "both sides" an issue but will not acknowledge that one side clearly got up and started the whole issue. ALSO im really sick of libertarians IGNORING the fact that HUMANS ARE GARBAGE! and assume that people will always act reasonably
+cat meat the libertarian assumption is literally that people always act in their own logical self interest. That is the core of Objectivism, and it is fucking stupid.
@@samiamrg7 No, it's the dumbed down version of someone who doesn't live in the real world. People don't always act in their logical self interest, people act in subjective self intererest. A base for libertarian worlview is that there is no objective value, all value is subjective to the person and circumstances. You cannot look into a person's mind to determine what they value, but you can infer some of it from their actions. If a person willfully trades a bottle of water for a chocolate bar, for example, then at least at that very moment they demonstrably value a chocolate bar more than a bottle of water. Therefore if your goal is to maximize value in society, letting people act without undue interference is the way to go. The idea that people act in their logical self interest can be proven false by a 2-minute trp to the nearest cassino, but is also opposite to the libertarian view of subjective value, since it requires you to have an objective view of value (usually adopting your own subjective view as objective and apply it to other people). You will then try to determine if person's action have brought them more of that objective value. If so, then it was in their self interest. For example, a person destroying their life with drugs is, according to nearly everyone, not acting in their self interest, but is at all time clearly pursuing their subjective self interest - they go for the thing that they value most at that moment. If there is no interference, people show through their actions what they value. If you bastardize views of the people you disagree with, then of course they will seem stupid. But I can't really blame you as many people who claim to be libertarians don't get it either.
It feels like this dude thinks he can Speech 100 his way out of war like its a Fallout game I respect his intentions but there are certain points where diplomacy unfortunately doesn't work and some people just can't be reasoned with. The debater fails to address how we should react in the event Putin doesn't follow a hypothetical peace treaty
To be fair, his dialogue tree was straight out of an RPG. "Well you see, maybe you should have cast "Diplomatic Resolution" with the Rampaging Troll; who had an INT of 1 CHR or 1 and Speech skill of 1. Ah yes! "Russia, how about instead of war. We tell you the Danbas belongs to us, and you leave us alone?" "Putin - *Loud Orc Noises*" Thanks Libertarian guy you diplomacied world peace! UwU OwO
It reminds me of that old 4chan /tg/ greentext where some guy (playing a tabletop campaign based on the real-life crusades) tried to end the holy war by convincing both sides that god wasn't real and that they should stop fighting and embrace rationality.
@@BackwardsPancake How long did it last before both the Muslims and the Christians temporalily agreed to cease hostilities while ridding the world of the godless scum?
Listening to this guy constantly saying "if you'll let me talk, let me finish and I'll tell you etc" and then not saying anything of substance is like the oral equivalent of the "hold me back lads" from someone pretending they're raring for a fight but really ain't got shit.
The moment he said he was a libertarian leftist I knew he was either going to be a tanky or someone that's either sympathetic to or just a straight fascist apologist.
My fav is when Delenn tells earth force to fuck off in severed dreams Only one human captain has ever survived battle with a Minbari Fleet. He is behind me. You are in front of me. If you value your lives, be somewhere else!
1:10:55 Says "are there elections?" in the most undeservedly smug way. HE'S THINKS RUSSIA IS A DEMOCRACY I DON'T WANNA BE ON THIS PLANET ANYMORE LET ME OFF
30 minutes in, and this guy is constantly dancing around the idea that the US and NATO are somehow at just as much at fault for Russia deciding to invade Ukraine, but he has thus far refused to say it. I wonder why. Could it be that he is a coward?
Vaush: I fear the right to medical assisted death may lead to a socio-economic crisis where poor people are presented with an alternative to poverty which is to die. Also Vaush: posts this debate.
When he said he is working on decentralized things I knew Elon would be mentioned. I'm a programmer and blockchains are interesting as an algorithm and all that, but crypto bros are literally retarded.
It's fucking rich that the guy who bitches about you using the "he started it" argument chooses his main argument line to be "but he did it so why can't I"
@@Chatrbuug not that I’m aware but if you look at the two of them and also listen to the way that they argue though they are VASTY different in ideas they both look alike and fall into the same pits
@@fjnordthedwarf4004 even the gifts of nurgle do not save me from the excruciating pain of this debate. Even the immaterium cannot protect us from such potent liberalism!
I’m going to start calling myself a tankie exclusively to distance myself from this guy holy shit. “Uhm yeah so we need a plan and a framework but if you think of contingency plans you’re an anti-intellectual” Jesus Christ I’m going to video game myself
"Maybe if we taught Enclave the correct framework they wouldn't want to genocide all of the wasteland.🤔" "Perhaps the villagers should open a dialogue with the raider bands, checkmate, wanderer.🙃"
When this guy gets swatted, he shouldn't play the blame game and realize he asked for it when he went on this debate and said provocative shit that pissed a lot of people off, so really it's his fault when his life gets ruined :) I'm just using his own logic.
Just to dispel any misconceptions, no, I wouldn't actually do this. See, I would like to be better than this guy and not sow more discord into the world. I would rather be the defender, not the aggressor. Unless my life was threatened, I'm not going to choose violence. I'm merely making a point that his logic is flawed.
What is there to be ignorant of? After Hitler and Stalin jointly invented Poland it changed hands until the Berlin Wall solidified the borders between East and North Europe.
@@ashfox7498 What is there to be ignorant about?!? For one just because America didn’t get involved in European geopolitics until the 20th century doesn’t mean that Europe didn’t exist before then. There are thousands of years of history here, with complicated interactions between kingdoms Empires and ethnic groups. A history that is very much alive and present in our societies, in our culture, our identity and every day life. You don’t know enough even to understand how ignorant you are.
Bro we didn't need the revolutionary war. We just needed to vote king George out of the colonies. By the way defending yourself is cringe and having a government is dumb anyways, so we should just let the monarchy stay. Why don't we just negotiate? I am very intelligent
@@ec_money I don't see a functional difference between libertarians, conservatives, and fascists. Libertarian ideology never, ever, ever meshes with the policies pushed by libertarians. At least, not here in the US.
It's terrible that there are so few libertarian socialists. But what's far worse is that a lot of people who call themselves "libertarian socialists" are like this dude
Every time I come back to this video I just want to shove this man in a locker. He thinks he's so smart by saying "how about you do it better, but instead call it a framework."
What does he mean plan B? As if this was a planned invasion on either side lol this is the plan B…. He talks about how we should try diplomacy…. And ignores all the diplomacy that we tried
He thinks he is so smart for thinking of this, but keeping open the possibility of negotiating a peace has been a basic diplomatic practice for literally thousands of years. That option is always, always on the table, the question is if boths sides can agree on something, and so far, that hasn’t happened.
Like, this isn’t a fantasy world where nations keep up blood feuds for generations. Wars usually end with negotated settlements, and complete domination of one side by the other like in WW2 is not the norm. It isn’t even the norm for World Wars considering WW1 ended in an armistice, not unconsitional surrender
@@samiamrg7 but Russia broke all the other peace deals they obviously aren’t working towards peace so why should they get this option for peace that they have been denying the ukranians… the Russians asked for war and now they got it and anyone thinking they should be negotiated with is just kinda dumb
@@elkosins1686 Ukraine probably can’t fight it’s way to Moscow and force unconditional surrender on Russia, so this war has to end in some kind of treaty or at least a long-term ceasefire á la the Korean War. Unlike past treaties, this one would be backed by the practical experience of Russia meeting considerable resistance and Ukraine getting even closer to NATO, making any future meddling or attempts at military action dangerous and liable to not go well.
@@samiamrg7 Ukraine has no intention nor does it need to go to Moscow to win it really just needs to hold out… your punishing the ukranians because Russia is choosing to bomb them relentlessly even though they have no chance of invading back…. And now that you see them actually having a chance… your dumbass only now starts asking for peace because it’s convenient to your fascist buddies This war has been pushed on to them without their choice… diplomacy already failed now let them fight you coward
Vaush has a saintly amount of patience. This guy makes me violently angry when I hear vaush make a statement that makes total sense to me and this guy basically ignores it.
I'd be genuinely amazed to find out this dude can tie his own shoes in the morning. IDK what's worse, the brain rot, or his absolute confidence in saying nothing with so many words.
"He broke into my house and decided one of my rooms is his and he won't stop physically fighting me for it!" "OK woah, let's not play the blame game here. It's important to stop the violence. Just accept the deal and let him have that one room!"
It's funny how people just quickly forgot that the Donetsk People's Republic since 2014, making it clearly a Russian proxy-war against Ukraine and not an American proxy-war.
“C’mon, guys, can’t we talk about this??” He asks, standing between the two trench lines at Passchendaele, as artillery detonates meters away. “I really think that if we sat down and discussed this like adults, cooler heads would prevail.” Genius.
1:14:48 If somebody breaks a legally binding contract, there is a government with a monopoly of force that can FORCE you to abide by the contract or to make some kind of reparation. On the level of geopolitics, this FORCE can take the form of MILITARY FORCE.
