Comments by "" (@indonesiaamerica7050) on "" video.

@BTsMusicChannel The key to critical thinking is understanding and organizing claims and biases, not pretending that bias doesn't exist or that it's all just competing versions of "community truth." Even your use of of the term "political" shows an unconscious worldview bias.
2
@HistroryOnics OMG. Don't be absurd. "History" is a collection of claims about the past. That is the only categorical thing that anyone can say about it. There's nothing immutable about any claims.
2
@BTsMusicChannel Critics citing selfish interests is not ipso facto evidence of corruption or distortion. You're relying on leftwing "social" pseudo-sciences that "know" that humans can't even be aware of their own selfish interests and therefore they can't develop balanced, objective reportage. Everyone but them, apparently, suffer from this flaw. "Woke" professors and journalists are the Masters of Objectivity, we're to assume, since they "know" how flawed everyone else is.
2
@HistroryOnics Some fact claims are verifiable. The problem is the conflation of inference and verifiable evidence. Most idiots today rattle on only about their pet inferences as "facts" because they can correctly cite, for example, Trump's swearing in date and therefore all of their other claims must be reliable. LOL. The reader is supposed to cull salient facts. That's what we used to teach students before "socialized" schools started organizing "communities" and protecting "victims of Patriarchy" and all of that abject BS.
2
@BTsMusicChannel There's no infinite pool. What's apparently infinite is the imagination of nihilistic, dogmatic critics. If you want to study "A history of A" you put together a thesis (or at least a coherent framework to organize your claims) and give examples with some verifiable, salient facts. And then people comment on it. If the world is populated with enough intelligent critical thinkers they work together to improve the articles and the process of creating them. OTOH, now that schools around the world assume the worst of their students they're instead fed first rate bullshit and then given little awards for trivial accomplishments and told to get a job working for Facebook or Google. In the end they sit around doing nothing but reading "social media" and trying to figure out who is the best political messiah to extort the taxpayers in to paying for their things and giving them cash entitlements for the rest of their lives.
2
@SG-hf8pj You're not even capable of engaging in an information-seeking conversation. "Name calling" has nothing to do with any of it. I criticized "socialized education" doctrines and results. You came along to pretend that your views, that you can't even articulate clearly, are superior, and you sort of attempted to use your cult's pedantic memes to scare off anyone from actually considering my criticisms. You did nothing to attempt to flesh them out or even try to figure out what validity you might find in them. In the process, you exemplified everything that I am pointing out in terms of results. You don't even know how to use a fucking dictionary and instead try to diminish my critiques by using the "buzzwords" term (as a buzz word!) to signal to your groupthink cult to ignore my critiques. You are a perfect exemplar to support my argument. You're totally unaware that in a debate I could fully defend the "Progressive" worldview, relying on Darwinism and related pseudosciences to show (without proper testing) that "disparity" is innate to natural humans and that the closest thing to "social justice" that humanity can achieve is when Enlightened Elites (AKA "democratic Brain Trusts" in the time of FDR) are ruling every polity. WTF would I care about your inane FUD memes when you're clearly a victim of everything that I've mentioned? You know it. All of the readers know it. They simply fear that there are no better choices because they fear that disparity in cognitive abilities is innate. To admit that their theories have not been properly tested is to throw away their entire worldview and submit to doctrines that they hate. IOW, emotional responses with "community truth" justifications. A secular cult that claims "science" without demonstrating any scientific nous. You and your entire cult demonstrates a rejection of progressive scientific knowledge while claiming to be masters. Just as Bruce Jenner "identifies as" female when everyone knows that this is simply an agreed upon lie.
2
@bsymissy No. The Civil War never ended. Some slavers turned to the KKK and States' rights while others, sometimes the same people but without their robes on, invented what they call Progressivism, because that put them in charge of the entire legal system. Over time, "globalist" elitists joined in common cause with US elitists. That's what we now call "the left" (which was originally Jacobinism). It is led mainly by elitist "community organizer" lawyers.
2
@matthewlvh Explain the alleged "Republican Party outright lying."
2
@tiaan7032 You're supposed to be able to cull fact claims from spin. Changing from channel to channel should make that clear. It's those that live in rigidly protected cultural bubbles that get confused by any contrary views.
2
Alvino A So? That's a caveat doctrine, not "wisdom" or something like that. Claims are claims. That's it. If you want to build "knowledge" you have to learn how to vet and organize knowledge claims. It's a process. We can't just "choose to agree" that Napoleon never existed, as one example. We can comment on various things and that can affect "pop history" just as it affects popular "science" notions. Nonetheless, knowledge claims can be vetted over time and our understanding of what happened in the past becomes slightly clearer in the process. But few can even discern or control their own biases so it seems like a lost cause, I guess. I blame "socialized" schools. Our prediction models in "rocket science" and physics continue to get better but our ability predict the future of man gets worse. Nobody understands anything about human behavior. They all seem to want to be identified as "master expositor" rather than figuring out some truly rational prediction paradigms. Noam Chomsky is some kind of "social justice" guru and a total idiot. Most of the other "thought leaders" are even worse.
1
@SG-hf8pj What nihilistic idiocy are you spouting? Today's schools are "anti progressive" in that they teach nihilistic bullshit like you're spouting all framed on the assumption that "community truth" is the only "truth" that can exist. IOW, there's no such thing as objective "truth" other than what we all agree that we can observe, and what we infer from that observation is also subject to "community truth." That is utter bullshit. We don't teach critical thinking. We teach "critical theories" all premised on the assumption that "critical thinking" is "racist" in the sense that critical thinking leads to "unmanageable disparity" or "Social Darwinism." In order to have Progressive "managed Social Darwinism" the plebs must be taught all of the "critical theories" with "racist" ideas that lead to "unmanaged disparity." It's doctrinaire Progressivism minus critical thinking. IOW, it's inherently regressive and anti-scientific. I don't need to appeal to my history or training to support what I wrote. Since you seem to think that it does I'll mention that I have a background in US Constitutional law, history (studying the history of English common law and British monarchy), computer sciences, electronics, material and biological sciences and the nexuses such that I can advise "medical" enterprises in order to obtain credentials to sell products in the USA and around the world) and manage risks. I must liaise between all of the various "experts" across "world cultures" AND "expert" cultures. It doesn't take a genius to do that. It takes a proper fundamental education and careful progressive, relevant experience. Teaching about culture and critical thinking are not the same thing. Anyone can be taught critical thinking. Critical thinking should be the seed of all teaching doctrines in any "democratized" academy. It's not. European philosophers (with the help of crazed, idiotic lawyers and elected officials as allies) killed it in Western academies when they "socialized" the schools.
1
@SG-hf8pj You're a total idiot. Full stop. You don't have the cognitive skills nor the appropriate humility to even formulate relevant questions. Instead you fill in your own deluded worldview and imagine yourself as having superior understanding while at the same time knowing that you are just another ignorant victim of socialized schools. You aided my argument while attempting to dismiss it. How sad. You do this because you don't even imagine that you could have learned more with access to better schools and much better teachers. Buzzwords. My God. What a pathetic response.
1
@SG-hf8pj Moron, Formulate an intelligent question. Stop lying.
1
Alvino A That's not what fact means. The original assertion was unqualified. Categorical. You then try to support it with a "critique" of "people" knowing you can always find examples of flawed people and flawed claims that you will continue to imply is "proof" of your categorical assertions. Rather than saying "history is agreed upon lies" you should start off by saying that people can be idiots. That says nothing about 'history" except that "history" is a product of humanity.Quality varies wildly. But it's a fact that claims can be vetted and therefore most serious historians and their claims can be rated and the historical claims that survive vetting can rarely be described as "agreed upon lies" by anyone but hypocritical lying revisionists. It's just not that easy to lie while making "big history" claims. It's usually "POV history" like "A People's History" or whatever. And even they are not lying so much as promoting idiotic worldviews. Most of what you find in "the history section" of any US library is based on verifiable records but also known POV. Not lies at all. The fact is that people like Napoleon like to propagate partisan lies to "replace" inconvenient facts about themselves.
1
@jamesrichardson3322 Not exactly. The elitist slavers pivoted to controlling DC Commanding Heights. You think they weren't aware of Marxist theories? Of course they were. They understood the need for "Soviets" to guide "labor." They're neo-Soviets trying to take power under "dictatorship of the proletariat" and some are loyal to DC Democrats as "vanguard party" while others are just waiting for End of History Communism when all the wealth is "shared fairly" whether by Pelosi, Biden, Xi, Kamala, they don't care. The whole "southern neoconfederacy" meme is stupid. Because there are a select few, I assume, that think they can just ignore the big picture and harken back to the way things were. That's not a dominant theme in any significant movement of today. You're seriously deluded if you think so. You listen to too many idiotic stories from academics that feed you false binaries of "good politics" and "bad politics". Most "Humanities" academics are morons. That's why they can't get work where they're held accountable for testable results.
1
@jamesrichardson3322 You're right that I've never met anyone quite like that.
1
@TheDrewker My goodness. You kooks are apparently beyond hope. Don't you understand what Freudian projection is? It's a caveat doctrine. And you missed the lesson.
1
@TheDrewker What you wrote is insane.
1
@TheDrewker You're a Gaslit moron. That's why you're so "exasperated" in ways that you can't even begin to explain. You know that you're an ignoramus and yet you "identify" as (or with) Progressive elitist (ignoramuses).
1
@TheDrewker You're a deranged liar. Quote Bannon if you want to make some kind of rational point about what you claim he said or did. You effing Gaslit lunatic.
1
@christianschwalbach7561 You should move to China and face your accusers there. Then when you're convicted we'll all laugh at you.
1
@matthewlvh LOL. It's not a lie. Do you know what "socialism" means? He certainly does want to destroy "status quo hegemony" of "the patriarchy." His philosophies and government doctrines come from neo-Marxism. This is regarded by all sentient thinkers as "socialism" unless you're a full blown pseudo-scientific lunatic that thinks Critical Theory is "Settled Science." Care to try again? Calling people "liars" for offering intelligent criticism is, well, it's insanely ignorant.
1
@Saltine Kracker Globalism that does not disparage Westphalian sovereignty is good. Globalism from those that hate equal application of the law is evil. They want to rule you with your consent after Gaslighting you for your entire school and voting life. It's not really about "isolationism" versus "globalism." It's about elitist demagogues and their "community organizing" that make weak thinking people believe that they must follow the "Our Democracy" cult. If not, The Patriarchy will enslave them, they imply.
1
@anpdm1 Empire building? You must be joking.
1
@bliss4383 You're no Republican. You're a neo-Marxist kook. You conflate dogmatic criticism with critical thinking. And if you want to engage in psychobabble with any credibility you should first contemplate the implications of Freud's "projection" paradigm.
1
@rickkoleyahoocom Ding-a-ling, what is being "dismantled" is the New Deal Administrative state. That is NOT the best hope anyone has ever had outside of the Communists that wanted an elitist "democratic" oligarchy to deal with as they expanded their hegemony throughout the globe. Research "American exceptionalism" from the Communist POV. America, they supposed, had to come last if at all. FDR caused this mess. His "New Deal" completely destroyed the judicial branch as protector of enforceable natural rights. All "rights" claims are now fully politicized and must be constantly renegotiated. Since you don't care about history enough to understand the philosophies and legal/cultural crucible that created the American Revolution and the documents that frame our legal system you have no idea how FDR destroyed it.
1
@lisakain1517 These kooks are literally triggered by "Arch Capitalist" Trump. They're conditioned by the insane teachers to see "capitalism" as one tiny step from Nazism. They have no natural critical thinking skills. They were destroyed in grade school.
1
@rickkoleyahoocom Did you even read what I wrote?
1
@rickkoleyahoocom The term was coined out of concern that America would resist "socialist arc of history" due to its massive differences from imperialist Europe that was still ruled mostly by monarchs and their oligarchies. America is physically isolated and made a clean break from the British legal system developed under the monarchs while preserving the "democratic" aspects of it. A Marxist materialist would focus on the "cultural hegemony" of the "capitalist class" that reorganized under "status quo property conditions" to enslave the "working class" and this isolation from Europe, along with massive natural resources, created massive challenges for the Marxist parasites. Of course people here different things when they hear the term, but it was coined by Marxists. In any case, the idea was that America would be incredibly difficult to crack the way that say, Russia had. Not only that but we started to protect emerging "democracy" in Europe. So we had to be handled with my "savvy" (lying propaganda) so that our protections would be less effective and they could foment revolution around the world and also become more successful with "democratic socialism" in the more developed polities. Winning over FDR was their biggest coup of all time, without doubt.
1
@rickkoleyahoocom It's not being dismantled. The coup occurred decades ago. They destroyed the courts and now protect Administrative state powers that are practically impossible for voters to keep tabs on in time for elections. And the Administrative state is the unofficial tool for culling political candidates. That's been happening, again, since FDR. How do you think we ended up with Romney as "Republican candidate" for President? And how about McCain? They're kooky "conservative" Progressives. The same goes for both Bushes and everyone but Reagan. Even Trump is a recovering Progressive. At this stage it's all we can hope for because we need to rebuild the judicial branch and the schools. The only thing being "dismantled" in America is the industrial base. But that's a side effect of the deals the elitist idiots make. That can snap back quickly. The human resources and materials are still there. It's just that the "heroes of the workers" have screwed the workers, big time. They took power under "emergency" conditions and then after the Cold War wanted to "cash in the peace dividend" by pretending that China would hold elections and stiff if only we just help them get rich? They're insane idiots. They're screwing US workers and holding the courts hostage. It's relatively easy to undo if leftwing idiots would wake up from their ridiculous "woke" cult and "Green New Deal" nonsense.
1
@rickkoleyahoocom Identity Politics is indeed old. It's a newer skin for Marxist "class war" claims. They organize it under "victims of disparity" and by that they mean "Capitalism." Sometimes they allude to "Patriarchy." So it's new only in how it is propagated. It was created, actually, as part of the effort to foment the "international workers revolution" with "allies." Also, Darwin, Freud and so forth are the ones that suggested people "evolve" through families, clans and tribal alliances and rivalries. Capitalists would be the "top domain predators." Marxists try to use pseudo-scientific concepts to propagate their worldview as "social sciences" or "scientific socialism." Identity Politics basically implies that your alliances are discernible mostly by the group that you "identify" with but this is layered on the elitist view that only they know how to properly label everyone else. Hence, Trump is "dictator" identity or "Nazi" and so forth. They played Identity Politics with the Nazis as well conflating them with "right wing" so that they could smear everyone in America that disagreed with Progressives as "Nazis" or of the same ilk or "genetic family."
1