I know a few VERY wealthy people. They usually work insane hours and provide jobs to hundreds of people. Not to mention the buildings on campuses named after them for the millions donated.
I watched it to the end. You didn't miss much. He mainly just repeated the same stale slogans, phrases, and floating abstractions that his fellow communists typically utter. He's merely one of millions of Lenin's modern useful idiots.
It’s all been tried over and over. The Greeks 2500 years ago realized that a naked pure democracy resulted in tyranny and discrimination. The first thing this kid would do is remove your 1st and 2nd amendment rights, followed quickly by the rest of them.
That the current generation is less stable and well off than previous generations, is less likely to afford to get on the property ladder, and that corporate profits seem to them to be the sole reason for their lack of financial stability and success as a generation. When you have generations feeling disempowered financially, as well as seeing the corruption in both political parties at the top, they are ripe for being brainwashed into believing that our current system is wrong and can’t be fixed, and must be broken and replaced by this ‘utopian’ other system called communism. They’re told that this other system is one of equality and fairness, and where greed won’t happen. It’s all delusion, but it’s because they’re not educated and they’re also disillusioned with the current state of society.
He has unshakeable commitment to floating abstractions, including "the working class", and he, like other Statists (Socialists, Fascists, and Theocrats) regard a group or a floating abstraction ("The People", "The Proletariat"; "Society as a Whole"; "The Common Good"; "The State"; "One Nation"; "God", etc.) they regard them, NOT an individual human being, as a primary unit in a society. That is the fundamental basis for their denial of legitimate individual rights.
I was struggling to articulate precisely what I found so irritating about they way he argues and you've pretty much nailed it. I would add that the one concept he discusses that actually does come close to being a 'floating abstraction' - is 'money in bank accounts', which he seems to think of as a concrete, material thing with a fixed value that will survive his revolution. Which is to get things completely arse about tit as my grandmother would say.
Well at least you managed to find someone who was willing to talk to you. He seems to actually believe in his ideas that he put forward. I might not agree with him but I applaud his willingness to speak about it.
I realize this will be read as "Hi! Idiot here," but I was a real communist for many years and argued much as this young man does--in fact, I must concede he is more articulate than I was. I appreciate your airing this as I'm still working out where the doctrine runs into fallacy and fantasy, where there may be some truth. For that reason, I only wish I'd heard more in response from you.
The Tories who had earned their private property by means of voluntary trade had every right to keep all of it, as the colonists had to keep all of their property that they earned the same way, and not have Washington expropriate it from them, as he did from whiskey distillers. If the Tories had property that they had received from King George III, that property was stolen by the king and distributed to his employees and civilian supporters. That property should have been returned to their rightful owners.
Peter should have asked the communists by what physical means would he and his comrades expropriate that private property, and how would they deal with private property owners who refused to comply with communists' demands to hand it over? If this communist is consistent in his commitment to his political philosophy, he would have to answer, "by physical force, and if they resist, we would kill them."
Communism, like the other expressions of Statism: Socialism, Fascism, and Theocracy, deny legitimate individual rights, especially private property rights, and support and practice the initiation of physical force up to and including the commission of murder to achieve its ends: dictatorship and slavery.
It kind of reminds me of the concept of a nudist commune. There are details you just don't want to know, you don't want to live with 3 families to a house and btw, communism has failed over and over. A visit might be interesting but blistering sunburn is the risk. Watch the original Dr. Zhivago, the one with Julie Christie and Omar Shariff, directed by David Lean. Boris Pasternak, the writer who had his prize winning novel smuggled samizdat (piece by piece in the linings of suitcases) from Russia to the original Italian publisher, told the real story of the people during and after a "people's revolution." For a window into the woke "Komintern" look up "Trans Journalists' Association Style Guide" webpage, where "experts" declare that traumatized ex-wives, children of or parents of narcissists living in a delusion are never to have their side of the story told.
I spent 40+ years on the Factory Floor. Try a dead run in 120 degree heat making Bolts, 12 0n 12 off 12 day on 2 days off making Urethane calk, Then come talk to me.
Do you seriously think that you would have been hired to perform that work if there were not enough market demand for urethane calk that made it worthwhile (i.e., profitable) to produce?
Communists worship the physicality of physical labor, and not at all the thinking that guides that labor. Their Labor Theory of Value regards physical labor as having intrinsic value completely independent of and inherently superior to the market (i.e., individual consumer-determined) value of the product of labor.
Revolutionary Communists of America. Be careful what you ask for. You Just Might Get It. Good And Hard.
Seems to be here in the UK with a huge majority. Heaven help us!
I know a few VERY wealthy people. They usually work insane hours and provide jobs to hundreds of people. Not to mention the buildings on campuses named after them for the millions donated.
This was the first Spectrum Street Epistemology video I couldn’t watch to the end - and not just because of that crime of a moustache.
I watched it to the end. You didn't miss much. He mainly just repeated the same stale slogans, phrases, and floating abstractions that his fellow communists typically utter. He's merely one of millions of Lenin's modern useful idiots.
It’s all been tried over and over. The Greeks 2500 years ago realized that a naked pure democracy resulted in tyranny and discrimination. The first thing this kid would do is remove your 1st and 2nd amendment rights, followed quickly by the rest of them.
Democratic communism? Good luck with that model.
If communism was that great wouldn’t we all be communists already?
Democratic communism is an oxymoron.
Idealism born of delusions, thanks to a grain of truth.
What "grain of truth" is that?
That the current generation is less stable and well off than previous generations, is less likely to afford to get on the property ladder, and that corporate profits seem to them to be the sole reason for their lack of financial stability and success as a generation. When you have generations feeling disempowered financially, as well as seeing the corruption in both political parties at the top, they are ripe for being brainwashed into believing that our current system is wrong and can’t be fixed, and must be broken and replaced by this ‘utopian’ other system called communism. They’re told that this other system is one of equality and fairness, and where greed won’t happen. It’s all delusion, but it’s because they’re not educated and they’re also disillusioned with the current state of society.
He has unshakable faith in the power of “the working class” to vote for the right thing.
He has unshakeable commitment to floating abstractions, including "the working class", and he, like other Statists (Socialists, Fascists, and Theocrats) regard a group or a floating abstraction ("The People", "The Proletariat"; "Society as a Whole"; "The Common Good"; "The State"; "One Nation"; "God", etc.) they regard them, NOT an individual human being, as a primary unit in a society. That is the fundamental basis for their denial of legitimate individual rights.
I was struggling to articulate precisely what I found so irritating about they way he argues and you've pretty much nailed it. I would add that the one concept he discusses that actually does come close to being a 'floating abstraction' - is 'money in bank accounts', which he seems to think of as a concrete, material thing with a fixed value that will survive his revolution. Which is to get things completely arse about tit as my grandmother would say.
Well at least you managed to find someone who was willing to talk to you. He seems to actually believe in his ideas that he put forward. I might not agree with him but I applaud his willingness to speak about it.
I realize this will be read as "Hi! Idiot here," but I was a real communist for many years and argued much as this young man does--in fact, I must concede he is more articulate than I was. I appreciate your airing this as I'm still working out where the doctrine runs into fallacy and fantasy, where there may be some truth. For that reason, I only wish I'd heard more in response from you.
The Tories who had earned their private property by means of voluntary trade had every right to keep all of it, as the colonists had to keep all of their property that they earned the same way, and not have Washington expropriate it from them, as he did from whiskey distillers. If the Tories had property that they had received from King George III, that property was stolen by the king and distributed to his employees and civilian supporters. That property should have been returned to their rightful owners.
Peter should have asked the communists by what physical means would he and his comrades expropriate that private property, and how would they deal with private property owners who refused to comply with communists' demands to hand it over? If this communist is consistent in his commitment to his political philosophy, he would have to answer, "by physical force, and if they resist, we would kill them."
Communism, like the other expressions of Statism: Socialism, Fascism, and Theocracy, deny legitimate individual rights, especially private property rights, and support and practice the initiation of physical force up to and including the commission of murder to achieve its ends: dictatorship and slavery.
It kind of reminds me of the concept of a nudist commune. There are details you just don't want to know, you don't want to live with 3 families to a house and btw, communism has failed over and over. A visit might be interesting but blistering sunburn is the risk. Watch the original Dr. Zhivago, the one with Julie Christie and Omar Shariff, directed by David Lean. Boris Pasternak, the writer who had his prize winning novel smuggled samizdat (piece by piece in the linings of suitcases) from Russia to the original Italian publisher, told the real story of the people during and after a "people's revolution." For a window into the woke "Komintern" look up "Trans Journalists' Association Style Guide" webpage, where "experts" declare that traumatized ex-wives, children of or parents of narcissists living in a delusion are never to have their side of the story told.
The working class should try working
I spent 40+ years on the Factory Floor. Try a dead run in 120 degree heat making Bolts, 12 0n 12 off 12 day on 2 days off making Urethane calk, Then come talk to me.
Do you seriously think that you would have been hired to perform that work if there were not enough market demand for urethane calk that made it worthwhile (i.e., profitable) to produce?
Communists worship the physicality of physical labor, and not at all the thinking that guides that labor. Their Labor Theory of Value regards physical labor as having intrinsic value completely independent of and inherently superior to the market (i.e., individual consumer-determined) value of the product of labor.
They get So much wrong ts hard to know where to start.