The David Graeber quote that Curtis mentions is brilliant. I enjoyed Graeber's books, especially "Bullshit Jobs" (and absolutely loved Curtis's Hypernormalisation as well btw). More episodes like this, Chapo. Awesome stuff, thought provoking.
Can't Get You Out of My Head is one of the best films of the year. If Twin Peaks: The Return can be considered a film then gosh darn it so can Curtis's masterpiece.
I feel like what Adam is (unknowningly perhaps) pointing towards... is the incredible need for global healing. I am very much convinced that the majority of people are traumatised individuals and much of this is intergenerational, and related to our deep uncertainty and confusion about our identity as the beings that we are and what our role or purpose may or may not be in the universe. I think we need to find internal safety in order to find external progress towards a global society of peace and prosperity and justice for all - this isn't just an... 'all you need is love'-style ramble... I think it's in fact the only way forward, and is tied to ecological knowledge and I think technology is a key factor in enabling people to develop together. Quite frankly I think ecological, technological and psychological developments are keystones for a new global society that doesn't hate itself or rip itself apart through individualist or nationalistic assinine policies and wars.
I've just noticed something incredibly odd about Adam Curtis. He doesn't go errrrr, or ummmm when speaking. He hardly ever even pauses or hesitates when speaking.
one of the better episodes, on par with the Alan Moore and Wallace Shawn ones, honestly Chapo should just completely pivot to Matt making CushVlogs, Will interviewing people and Felix gaming and watching RU-vid with the FYM boys
this was the most i m p o r t a n t episode i've honestly heard in a while and i'll be coming back to it a lot. i love the entertaining stuff, the silly stuff for the end of my shift at work, but i really enjoyed this conversation and i hope i can get some of the people i've held onto for the last 4y to give it a chance. it doesn't talk to down to anyone; the bernie bit at the end is a point i've been stuck on for a while.
I agree that there was a level of hysterics to the reaction on the 6th but I don’t want us on the left to confuse incompetence with some sort of sad apathy. I think anyone who wants to try to minimize the capitol riot has to answer the question.. what would the rioters have done if they had overwhelmed the police and gotten their hand on palosi or aoc or pence for that matter? Because it seems pretty clear to me that they would have torn them to shreds. If anything the apathy and sadness that we saw was a reaction to the fact that they prob really didn’t expect to get as far as they did and once they were inside and there wasn’t a magic “reverse the election button” they didn’t know what else to do but shout and stomp around
@@ElTiburonfeliz they literally got into the senate chambers and nancy’s office.. once they saw there was no one there to take their anger out on they just mulled around.. but say they had found nancy cowering under her desk... what happens next in your mind?
@@ElTiburonfeliz if your entire argument for why the coup didn’t happen is sheer stupidity doesn’t mitigate the fact that there was an attempt to find the people they held responsible for keeping trump out of power.. kill those ppl.. then have trump take over.. dis it work? No. Was it a good idea? No but it’s intorely consistent white what I said.. and to minimize it it really gross of u
Curtis otm about how culture became the safe bastion for radicalism/revolution, keeping it far away from the actual levers of power, & the Internet prob completed this. Without moralizing at all about streaming or online piracy you could say that this--because it divorced culture from money--was one of the necessary preconditions that allowed the huge upward transfer of wealth, maybe because it made it easier to ignore it at first..? At least until it was impossible to ignore, at which point, we were all powerless to really affect it...
1:05:?? - David Graeber...I mourn him more than I do my own mother...my mother was an asshole, btw, just to be clear. Ugh, I hate my life. My father is an asshole as well. I guess that makes me an asshole too...
The thing Curtis describes as "complexity theory" may exist and be important, but it is not the thing that is called "complexity theory". Moments like that make me wonder, what else is he getting wrong.
I've had that feeling about Curtis for a while. He summarises reasearch into areas a bit too simply and bluntly. Is it because he can't articulate it correctly or because he misunderstands it? I have to doubt a lot of what he says whenever he references anything outside politics.
Somebody please inform Adam that the welfare state he talks about was fought for by the working class !! thanks to and because of !! the ideas of communism and socialism, and only existed as long as there was a serious threat to laissez fair capitalism on the other side of the "iron curtain". since that threat started to crumble, the welfare state has been systematically dismantled with ever growing viciousness all over the western world, starting from his very own home country led by its very own Iron Lady, and it will only continue being crushed into dust until there is nothing left of it, but a faded memory described in history books. just like democracy.
the working class did not seize total power and force those reforms in, those reforms were the work of either cynical paternalistic conservatives like bismarck who wanted them on his side, cynical paternalistic liberals like lloyd george and FDR who wanted them on their side, or the result of bargaining between bureaucratic social democratic worker's parties and the traditional parties of capital in order to stabilize the social order and keep capitalism functioning if that welfare state has been dismantled so easily in our "democracies", and the working class turns against them (or at least a significant percentage of the working class has turned against them in favor of either xenophobic nationalism or adopting the ideals of capitalism), what is the use in arguing for another welfare state reform boom, why do we have to go back to a different idea that hasn't worked in the past
@@michaelsalmon9832 well that is an interpretation of history for sure. A Liberal one at that. It is no secret that liberals dispise any idea of social transformation that is not the result of some enlightened and calculating individual. Oh and of course a deeply anti-comunist one. Fortunately for the rest of us, that's just not historically the case. If it makes you feel good though, fine with me. Just consider that it is in principle not far from your usual conspiracy theory of, say, the illuminati ruling the world.. Or any cabal for that matter. PS, your answer is also typical for someone in the Anglo-Saxon world ignoring the rest of us. Like the world only consists of the two United Empires.....
@@LoisKl is it liberal the liberal version of history would say that the welfare state happened because of democracy; because the democratic capitalist state was actually democratic, and the people wanted welfare state reforms so they got them except that's not how it happened. the people didn't "elect" bismarck or lloyd george. they were either elected by the middle classes, like lloyd george, or they were put in power by the elite of the country, like bismarck. both of them feared socialism. passing welfare reforms was not their way of helping the working classes out of their benevolence or listening to their demands; it was because they wanted to DESTROY SOCIALISM. they wanted the working classes to be on their side; to win them over with trinkets given to them by the capitalist state so they would stop calling for revolution. welfare reforms were never socialist to begin with. there were and are a way to PRESERVE CAPITALISM. the same with FDR, the same with the previous roosevelt, the same as in france with the "solidarism" liberalism that openly copied bismarck despite proclaiming to be liberals the "golden age of capitalism" 40s-60s social democrats were the exact same. social democracy was a means of staving off communism, and of making a "perfect capitalism", or of some delusional belief that they could create socialism from within their own systems and just have the capitalists passively accept that. and yea, they've all failed, and have all been rolled back with the support of a significant percentage of the working class' support. almost like reformism never worked and was only accepted by the capitalist classes because they knew that the nature of capitalism itself would work against those reforms!
He bloody well knows that. Any infant knows that. He’s talking metaperspectives. Do you have anything better to do than straw-manning anything that comes out of his mouth?
@@michaelsalmon9832 I understand. I read your initial post again and then the second thoroughly. I don't disagree with you. What I mean, and I don't know if it necessarily contradicts what you are saying, is that all those concessions then made by the ruling class, whether elected or appointed, would not be considered had there not been a force to tame, meaning the working class, and with it the danger of socialism and communism. There was an actual threat to save capitalism from. That's what I mean. And as you say, all these things have been more or less violently taken back, during the last 40 years give or take. I live in Sweden for the past decade and come from Greece. The former is a prime example of a mindbogglingly peaceful dismantling of the pillars of the welfare state, while the latter a great example of its warlike destruction. It is not a coincidence I think that the full on dismantling of the welfare state in the West -in the countries that matter, my country could get away with the scrapes it had for a little longer- goes parallel with the decline of the USSR, or rather, its appeal as -or claim to be- an alternative to the West. The minute it stopped posing an actual threat, the counterattack could begin full force. Maybe our disagreement is in the order of causation? I just think it is unfair and kind of hopeless to attribute anything that is not a full win, to the scheming or something of capitalists. Just because a win is partial or incrimental, does not make it unworthy. I think it is important to take notes of what scared those in power to try and pacify the demands. I hope I explained my thinking better. :)
I didn't look it up but I imagine it would be either Saaed or Saheed (possibly an I instead of an E) Pate(h)b... ? I'm sure Google will figure it out if you get that and some other details in there
WTF are y'all talking about? Dancing is an incredibly communal experience. Partnered dancing, line dancing, dancing in carnivals and parades. Y'all are too bland to understand.
The thing for me about Adam Curtis is that he seems to contradict himself or be vague enough that I can only slightly understand what he actually _wants._ Like if he set up a political party, what would be it's ideology? What would it's manifesto state?
Good question, I asked myself this sitting through some of his documentaries. As a former journalism student I think I understand from this interview that he takes the journalistic ethos of showing how the world works while trying to remain neutral, to it's ultimate extent. He would not have a manifesto and he would not have an ideology other than exposing 'truth' or whatever knowable thing that is least far away from truth. Which is an important task. He poses the questions, but he doesn't give any answers.
I truly love you guys but if you insist on mocking Wandavision I may have to leave you - not out of anger but because I’ll have to reevaluate my respect for your intelligence and coolness. Seriously guys...
The emphasis on power is correct, much of the rest is nonsense and completely unchallenged here. Those in power having nothing to offer? They design and maintain the system which administers for capital.
He doesn’t deny that. What’s the substance of your point of contention? He said politicians gave away their power in the 1990’s which is true. You have misquoted him.
@@bbegins10 If it was a grand design plan or a coup as you're suggesting the result is still the same and the question remains the same - what are you going to do besides b1tch on and on about it?!
"People often accuse me of being a lefty. That's complete rubbish. If you look at The Century of the Self, what I'm arguing is something very close to a neoconservative position because I'm saying that, with the rise of individualism, you tend to get the corrosion of the other idea of social bonds and communal networks, because everyone is on their own. Well, that's what the neoconservatives argue, domestically. If you ask me what my politics are, I'm very much a creature of my time. I don't really have any. I change my mind over different issues, but I am much more fond of a libertarian view. I have a more libertarian tendency [...] What's astonishing in our time is how the Left here has completely failed to come up with any alternatives, and I think you may well see a lefty libertarianism emerging because people will be much more sympathetic to it, or just a libertarianism, and out of that will come ideas. And I don't mean "localism"." - Adam Curtis When the Facists gets criticized for being one, his reflex is to say "but He is also a very nice Man..." The man runs Defence for People he supposedly disagrees with. I personaly know a NazBol or two, and having never really heard of Adam Curtis before, he sounds very similar to one, always being careful with his words to try and seem as a progressive, but never really making the jump over. And I see people Here doing the same for him, trying to add context to what is said by pointing to this or that Film of his. I can understand why people are concernd with chapo letting him spread his Ideas on their Platform, even if they Distance themselfs in a soft tone, and even if the man himself is genuine in his belief, or the people defending him for that matter. "I’m emotionally sympathetic to radicalism […] I’m a progressive, I mean that's really what my politics are. I mean, I’m typical of my time, I don’t have a consistent set of politics and I always suspect people who do, but I’m progressive so I try and understand what went wrong with radicalism." - Adam Curtis, Elaborating on the first Quote above "People often accuse me of being a lefty. That's complete rubbish. If you look at The Century of the Self, what I'm arguing is something very close to a neoconservative position ..." / "I’m a progressive, I mean that's really what my politics are. I mean, I’m typical of my time, I don’t have a consistent set of politics..." / "If you ask me what my politics are, I'm very much a creature of my time. I don't really have any. I change my mind over different issues, but I am much more fond of a libertarian view. I have a more libertarian tendency... "
You’ve taken great pains here to prove you’re an ideologue and he’s not. He’s a journalist. You’re a typically very noisy leftist who talks a lot and says and does NOTHING.
If you actually listened to the interview instead of pushing your own pet social justice cause you would have heard him say that he's trying to escape this whole Marxist mind f#ck of tribalism or splitting the whole world into victims and victimizers. He sick of it and so am I because it leaves zero room for subtlety, ambiguity and nuance. It's an over-simplistic, one dimensional and obtuse way of looking at the world. AC has a refreshingly honest and inspired perspective.
Shockingly enough, mentioning how the trumpkins 'believed more' when their guy lost the election than 'the resistance' is telling, aside from being an irrelevant response to the observation
@@tinyspeaker strangely, yeah yeah was used more times in his brand interview , wussell covered his ineptitude as an interviewer with cringy jokes and long statements about russell brand which in my mind was annoying and boring
@@shootemupshootemdown it is strange, isn't it? Brand's deflection obviously isn't a sign of higher intelligence but he at least shows that he grasps everything Curtis says. He has fun trying to pry brand's mind open and keep him on track. Buxton is just a normie (like me) who doesn't really have anything meaningful to say
Funny how this liberal speaker speaks of "radical change" and three of his case studies are a counter-revolutionary, a fascist, a rapper and a Playboy columnist. Beautiful and haunting filmmaker, would listen to his pointless drivel again.
If you actually listened to the interview he said he chose to study those counter-revolutionaries because they didn't fall into the usual unambiguous "goodies and baddies" infantile framework. That is radical change in documentary storytelling by definition.
Curtis is a self described neocon, and he seems to be very interested in making the far right seem innocent. He'd have a better understanding of why things don't change if he understood that conservative ideology is the one actively preventing change under the guise of promoting "unit of one" thinking. He's too busy talking about both sides...
It's wild how pretentious Curtis is when you realize his politics are still just neoliberalism. Yeah man, I also wish there was some alternative to individualism, something that binds individuals together, somehow... I regret wasting the like 8 hours to watch his last piece but hypernormalization was good I guess.
"He who cannot get rid of a thought is so far only man, is a thrall of language, this human institution, this treasury of human thoughts. Language or “the word” tyrannizes hardest over us, because it brings up against us a whole army of fixed ideas. Just observe yourself in the act of reflection, right now, and you will find how you make progress only by becoming thoughtless and speechless every moment. You are not thoughtless and speechless merely in (say) sleep, but even in the deepest reflection; yes, precisely then most so. And only by this thoughtlessness, this unrecognized “freedom of thought” or freedom from the thought, are you your own. Only from it do you arrive at putting language to use as your property." - Max Stirner
Outstanding my dear awakened super cool individuals, the masters are indeed knowledgeable and most likely capable of creating a glorious new story for us to indulge in. Adam you are tremendous specimen, the Elon Musk of Journalism! we sorry ass individuals are grateful to your visions and remarks about where we are and what really happened in the back_offices... most important you have made peace with evil by exonerating him from all his sins and made it clear it was us all along who are the creators of the play and we can rewrite it again .
The ... Elon Musk of journalism? Hm, accusing Adam of stealing someone else's writings, bilking the US gov't/taxpayer of billions of dollars, and doing the equivalent of eating a lavish dinner next to a homeless camp and then throwing away the abundant leftovers and jeering at the hungry homeless people there (which is essentially what he did with his dick-shaped rocket when he could have given everyone healthcare or some other useful thing).
@@alexcarter8807 change your infos feeding apparatuses dude... Or just stop stereotyping everyone rich with same label... Last year elon musk paid 11billion dollars in taxes enough taxes for one person look up the records
@@alexcarter8807 - Occasionally you'll come across a stray brainlet like this one who wanders into the Chapo chat and publicly humiliates themselves by gargling the plums of Elon Musk or some other billionaire parasite. Neoliberals will always reveal themselves in how they worship at the alter of money.
Adam Curtis has been selling NazBol mythology via blogs and films since 2012. 36:31 LIMONOV finds "money has come into Russia and has corrupted everything and everyone" as powerless individuals, so decides "let's revive the old nationalist myths" and "fuses fascism and communism" into National Bolshevism, "trying to go back to the original modernist roots of fascism (I'm not praising him at all)", claims CURTIS. He saw "it had that power to excite people, that it gave you the enemy". LIMONOV was fascinated by Gabriele D'ANNUNZIO "one of the early fascists in italy, who said 'Look, human beings have the power to make the world anything they want'. It's the most exciting idea in the world". LIMONOV realised "that was the thing that could challenge this managerialist system." CURTIS takes LIMONOV seriously because "the third member of his NazBol party...was a musician I've always loved, called Igor 'Yegor' LETOV … i just thought he was brilliant, … if he's joining that party there's something really interesting about it … that's when i started reading about LIMONOV". [National Bolshevik Front was founded in 1992] LIMONOV "isn't a very nice person but he's sort of a truth teller [and] a really interesting way to look at our time", says CURTIS, "He's not a very nice man but on the other hand though, when you read his novel … you go, 'Oh yeah, actually that's really interesting". 64:30 CURTIS wants a story about the world "to have this sense that that, i quote this guy called David GRAEBER who's now, who's an activist, at both the front of the series and the end of the series, who simply said 'The great hidden truth about the world is that, we made this world and if we made it then we can make it differently and I find that really thrilling. I love that idea." GRAEBER died last year, CURTIS uses his words to return to D'ANNUNZIO's idea, which fascinated LIMONOV and thrills CURTIS.
When someone's right, they're right. I think Limonov is great for his characterization of Unites States as "a damned outhouse bereft of spirit or purpose on the outskirts of civilization" alone.
Gabriele D'Annunzio (1898), The Maidens of the Rocks: "The world is the representation of the sensibility and the thought of a few superior men, who have made it what it is, and in the course of time broadened and adorned it. In the future they will still farther amplify and enrich it, and the world as it today appears, is a magnificent gift granted by the few to the many, from the free to the slaves, from those who think and feel, to those who must work." David Graeber (2015), The Utopia of Rules "If artistic avant-gardes and social revolutionaries have felt a peculiar affinity for one another ever since, borrowing each other's languages and ideas, it appears to have been insofar as both have remained committed to the idea that the ultimate, hidden truth of the world is that it is something that we make, and could just as easily make differently. In this sense, a phrase like “all power to the imagination” expresses the very quintessence of the Left."
Probably the most boring episode I’ve listened to and basically just repeating 2017 takes on the election of Trump. He even exposed where he got have his points from when he name dropped Steve Bannon lollll. He basically regurgitated a Steve Bannon speech in 2017 / 2018 but made it more boring and gave it a 1% leftists slant.
