Comments by "" (@resir9807) on "Charisma on Command" channel.

@no_one01-5 Sure, you can go far enough in every direction. Fact is, science denial is an inherent part of contemporary right wing ideology the way it isn't on the left. Scientific truths about, say, Climate change or transgenderism are simply outright denied. Almost all professors and experts are on the left, and for good reason. I certainly oppose many viewpoints of the american left, but they at least know what scientific integrity means
1
@adama5929 Do you realize you come off as pretty patronizing? I like your pacifist mindset, your relaxed attitude and your sophisticated tone, but it doesn't mix well with your patronizing lecturing. You have some well-balanced opinions, and are probably more productive to the conversation than I am... but don't patronize. You're also just a dude or a gal with your take on the matter. Also, there is no misunderstanding. Do you realize the implication of believing that university and school indoctrinate children? Somebody who believes this is living in an alternate universe.
1
@SirSpence99 i literally grammatically don't understand the first part of your comment. As to the second... telling of what exactly?
1
@SirSpence99 guess i'm to busy taking a crirical look at my grammar
1
Everything becomes clear once you find out he's funded by conservative billionaires like the Koch brothers. His sole purpose on youtube is to indoctrinate teens into a far right narrative.
1
@manictiger bureaucracy is actually equally a tool of the right as of the left: it's not a partisan, but a political tool. I sincerely hope he doesn't. I'm not interested in trump as a person, but his policies are truly horrifying. Claims to support the little guy but cuts taxes on the rich? disgusting. Build a wall? what a huge waste of national resources for an ineffective solution to an overdramatized problem. Drop out of paris accords? what a disregard for a global problem and also a spit in the face of science.
1
@cheekclapper177 bro... you have fallen into the youtube-is-reality-illusion. This narrative crowder tries to spin that universities are indoctrinating students is absolutely horrific and reprehensible. Crowder is funded by conservative billionaires, the only reason he exists on youtube is to adnvance their interests. Crowder cites studies with horrible reputation, cherrypicks data, misinterprets history etc etc. I have a course specifically focused on scientific research, and the more I learn and look into crowder the more I'm scared for civilization.
1
Hey charlie, love the way you manage to aqquire a pristine objective perspective and analyse behaviour so thoroughly and accurately! Even though i don't think everything can be broken down perfectly, your explanations make sense to me on a very deep level! Btw, sry for the breakup keep going strong🙃
1
@alanparker4107 sam harris, sam seder, shaun, three arrows, vaush... Is that enough for you? No, not everyone screams insults at each other. That's just what you see on youtube, have you met reality? Some triggered college students don't represent the left, they're a small minority. And boy am I glad steven is demonetised - for all its faults, youtube has done one thing right. Sadly, it doesn't make a difference... youtube money is just a sidejob when you have the bucks from koch daddy flowing in
1
@Vision Thing Yes, you assume I argue from my vices, which you ascribe to me... how charitable of you. I recommend a channel called charisma on command to remedy this. Also, who do you imagine holds the mainstream media accountable? And who is giving them this "power"? You think they receive more funding than, take, PragerU on youtube? They WISH! The very fact that a media is MAINSTREAM means that it has more readers. If something gets more attention from the public, it also gets more attention from intellectuals, who critique something that stands in contrast to their expertise on the field. If you believe that this isn't happening for some reason anymore, the burden is on you to provide some VERY substantial proof!
1
@Vision Thing "You're trying to..." again, ascribing motives to me. I practically spammed the comment section of this video to death-wouldn't exactly call this not answering for my claims XD
1
@europeansovietunion7372 This sounds really interesting to me, as it contests my belief, but I can see you actually have at least SOME authority on the subject. Do you have any sources for your information? I'm not familiar with vegan sustenance but I'd genuinely like to check it out.
1
@junglemoose2164 glad I'm not boring you
1
@junglemoose2164 the word you're searching for is malarkey
1
Crowder is a right-wing ideologue whose sole purpose is to indoctrinate teens into a conservative narrative. He's receiving millions from conservative billionaires like the Koch brother, which is the major reason he still even exists on youtube. He never actually ever plans to change his mind, just to do whatever daddy says so that the money keeps coming in. Also, watch some of his podcast. Like, does this really, REALLY strike you, of all things, a KIND person? And everything about steven is pseudo-intellectual. He cherrypicks data, coming to opposite conclusions of studies he cites, misinterprets history and paints himself as "research-oriented". If you don't believe me, check out three arrows' videos on him.
1
@654Crossman check out some vaush, three arrows or shaun, if ur brave enough
1
@dilfhunter5645 I find your argument fallacious, but that aside, you're not arguing against my point. I'm not saying eating animals is inherently wrong, nothing is inherently wrong, I'm a consequentialist. I'm saying under the circumstances of modern society, many people are propagading a system of animal cruelty when indeed there are alternatives. If you are middle-class and don't have severe protein deficiency, there is no natural or political obstacle to you living a more moral lifestyle.
1
@dilfhunter5645 okay😂. too bad, i was having fun
1
Hi, can you please talk about sam harris and why he is so pleasant to listen to and so believable? ❤️ your channel, very useful and interesting!
1
@TheImapotato i don't understand what your saying, but i wholeheartedly agree to let YTs with more authority than me debunk crowder
1
@TheImapotato sorry genuinely didn't mean to, most people arguing your position are teens who fell down the YouTube right wing rabbit hole, i'm used to dealing with those.
1
@simonwinn8757 that's actually an interesting rebuttal. I'd really like to know which argument they've misconstrued, if you can tell me
1
@lodeo7003 I don't watch CNN
1
@brianmchaney7473 well i certainly heard it somewhere(probably vaush), otherwise i'd be making it up. But seeing how virtually every conservative platform is funded by kochs, it's practically impossible as a conservative to distance yourself from big daddy koch.
1
@brianmchaney7473 oh, this is common knowledge. Google "conservatives sponsored by koch brothers" or something like that and you'll see. This shouldn't be a surprise however. Almost all megacorporations push conservatives because hypercapitalism alignes with their personal interests.
1
@brianmchaney7473 I couldn't find anything proving crowder's funding by kochs either, so i guess that might not be accurate, or at least not by means of direct funding. My claim of general knowledge refers to conservatives largely being sponsored by megacorporations, which is beyond dispute. The problem is that crowder is not only a dishonest actor who holds some abhorrent views, but that he markets himself as data-oriented while every analysis he does is profoundly unscientific. The consequences of him being platformed by channels like this one is that viewers cross over to him, letting his propaganda reach a wider audience. There are many people that would have fit the purpose of this video, and there's a reason crowder was chosen. It's very easy to profit off right wing media - that's why they get so much attention.
1
@Jeremy Jensen I don't care about politics on youtube anymore. Please don't reply, have a nice day. (this goes for anyone reading this)
1
@arxci9402 Arxci how interesting that i see it the other way around! First off, I'm european, so my political lense isn't really "left" and "right". Second, being all about "facts" is a narrative the right has spun for themselves. It's a lot easier said than done. Sociology is a highly complex topic which requires scientific literacy a certain understanding of statistics to form a valid opinion on. The likes of ben shapiro, steven crowder, dave rubin are the height of sophistry and they hate facts, but they sure LOVE big donor money. Just take crowder's claims on transgenderism for example. They're not just scientifically false, the very studies he cites contradict his own conclusion, because he cherrypicks the data. Watch three arrows, shaun, vaush, any if these to debunk crowder. You don't have to be a leftist to understand how fraudulent these "fact-lovers" are.
1
@arxci9402 I can respect that, for someone new to all this. But believe me when I say youtube doesn't provide a healthy political diet. Before someone forms a political opinion, they should first know how to read studies, question data and beware of hidden motives. Everyone like to think they can do this, especially because it can go deeper levels. My first instinct is to never take a statistic at face value. I advise you to really do the work a few times and trace some studies, read their conclusion paragraph at least. Get a feel for what real science is actually like. If someone doesn't provide sources in the description of a political video with data claims, beware.
1
@jacobday3826 wow, what a killer argument. Are you a historian by any chance, to know what the Nationalsozialistische Arbeiterpartei was called?
1
@jacobday3826 There's something wrong with it if it's fake evidence presented as real one. He does it all the time. Just take his "debunking" of transgender science for example. I'm not exaggerating when I say every single factual claim was false or misleading. The very studies he cites come to a different conclusion than him, he just cherrypicks data. If you don't want to follow the sources yourself, there are enough breadtubers to debunk him.
1
@KongMonkE honestly, I think it's sad to see someone defend crowder after AP statistics (not that I really know what that is - that's a high school course that's supposed to be college level right?) You've just randomly named some legitimate sources. What about a concrete issue, like transgenderism? Every study crowder cites reaches his opposite conclusion, or he misrepresents the data. Also, what does statistics have to do with sourcing?
1
@sirpicklestien1436 i recommend watching some breadtube to see his propaganda debunked
1
@kleozane2781 nobody claimed cnn was a verified source. It's technically impossible for any people or group of people to be a "verified source". Studies can be though. And Steven's studies are regularly verified ANTI-SOURCES, they literally disagree with him in their conclusion because he misinterprets the data. If steven started citing conclusions instead of cherrypicked exerpts no right winger would follow him anymore.
1
@brandonvines929 That was so politically reductive i don't even know how to respond. I can't argue with someone who didn't get an education in politics
1
@BlijfEric I am by no means a historian, I just said my history lessons were very sensitized to Naziism, in the same way an american will learn a lot about american slavery and comparatively much less about Nazi germany. Obviously there's a really nuanced discussion to be had about the legitimacy of sources, but it's useless to acknowledge that to someone ideologically hotheaded, unlike you. There's powerful arguments to be made against third party sources, but by no means is the mainstream media venerated.
1
@BlijfEric There are a number from shaun, three arrows and vaush. Hope you'll see where I'm coming from
1
@BallHeadFreak oh wow, you must be a specialist then. because I sure as hell know you weren't taught that in school.
1
Fact: Islam is wrong My friend, you genuinely amuse me. To discard the model of one political axis with the claim that the one with two axes is truly legitimate is hilarious to me, and suggests a shallow understanding of politics to me. Let me tell you a secret: they're both just crude models and useful in different contexts. Now, we can argue about technical definitions to no end (which shift across time and space), so to me the interesting question is WHY Nazis are being called socialist. You may notice that it is only right wingers who do this. The goal is to liken the nazi regime to modern socialist movements in order to discredit them. As long as you see how modern socialist movements have pretty much nothing in common with nazis, you can call them whatever you want, potayto potahto. Notice that whether or not we call nazis socialist is completely irrelevant, as these political terms are too complex to narrow down in practice. Political understanding is not about how well you can apply umbrella terms like "socialism", "corporatism" or "fascism", but rather in-depth and multifacetted knowledge of specific policies and how they interact together. And when you look at the individual policies of the nazis and apprehend their intentions, you can see that comparing them to Fidel Castro or Venezuela or (idiotically) bernie sanders is useless.
1
@weldenbringhurst6517 Great, you get an A+ for your german
1
@junglemoose2164 I'm sad for you, I really am. We can accuse each other of falling for the other side's propaganda all we want. But I encourage you to google socialism and actually learn what it means. Then I encourage you to google "nazi policies" and critically compare the two. You are a critical thinker, right? You should probably get your historical sources from other places than just steven crowder
1