Are You TRAPPED in Outdated Political Thinking?

Рет қаралды 10,729

Michael Millerman

Күн бұрын

Пікірлер: 213

@ClassicCase 2 ай бұрын

I used to be a socialist, but then I took a tax return to the knee.

@bruhgh609 2 ай бұрын

Man. This comment might be one of the goat.

@tantalus1210 2 ай бұрын

I used to be a libertarian. Now I'm a monarchist waiting for the return of the king.

@vulkanofnocturne 2 ай бұрын

What you need is an Emperor.

@masscreationbroadcasts 2 ай бұрын

My man.

@ClassicCase 2 ай бұрын

Ultra based.

@GentlemanLife-Beyotch 2 ай бұрын

Gang bro.

@Frennemydistinction 2 ай бұрын

Two nerdy escapist dilettante political outlooks.

@OrwellsHousecat 2 ай бұрын

I used to be a Librarian but now I have a Kindle

@ArmwrestlingJoe 2 ай бұрын

I don’t know why this is hilarious

@tantalus1210 2 ай бұрын

@@ArmwrestlingJoe Rhetoric, just repeat the same pattern with slight alterations for mesmerizing effects. Pretty much every memes becomes just that and the more absurd it gets from the original meaning the funnier. And now the frog is dead I guess.

@chesscomsupport8689 2 ай бұрын

@@tantalus1210 Is the frog dead because of chemicals in the water?

@Mongoloid69 2 ай бұрын

I used to be a liberal. Now I identify as a far-right extremist.

@simonesewero9405 2 ай бұрын

360 degree changing 😳

@JoeSims1776 2 ай бұрын

I used to be a liberal. Now I identify as extremely online

@SSJKamui 2 ай бұрын

@@Mongoloid69 I was a libertarian switching to fourth political theory with a few bits of moldbugian nrx involved

@bobby-and2crows 2 ай бұрын

This is so much fun, me too.

@bobby-and2crows 2 ай бұрын

@@SSJKamuimaybe you are right about everything , i dont know, fuck me right?

@Davidbirdman101 2 ай бұрын

Interesting ideas. I guess it all depends on your perspective. I was born in Mississippi in 1957, my mom was a lifelong FDR Democrat. We were very poor, I mean, dirt poor. My father was a share cropper and one of my first memories is of being drug up and down rows of cotton on the end of a cotton sack by my mother. We lived in a big ol ramshackle house with no heat except for a wood burning stove. We survived by getting "commodities" ( Google it) and charity. My father was a raging alcoholic and was terribly affected by the second world war in which he served throughout the whole war in the Pacific and had 2 ships sunk under him. We were forced to listen to him recall every battle with all it's gory details every time he got drunk. My brothers and sister and I went bare footed in the summer months because shoes were really expensive and were only worn to church and special occasions. Then came Viet Nam and both of my brothers were drafted and sent to southeast Asia to stop the "DOMINOES" from falling. My mom voted for a Republican one time and that was Nixon because he promised to end the war in Viet and that Lyndon Johnson said was crucial to preserving "democracy" in the world. Well, Viet Nam fell and America fled and as far as I know, the dominoes didn't fall. Then came Iraq. After preserving the status quo for the rich oil tycoons and George Bushes, we just had to go back in and get those "weapons of mass destruction" , then we also had to go into Afghanistan and install "democracy" so the Taliban would not train terrorists and harm women. So we spent trillions and trillions of dollars and killed thousands and thousands of people and maimed children and blew up a wedding party(for which we had to pay out millions in compensation), we handed over bags of cash to warlords to keep them from killing our troops. Then one day Joe Biden decides that it's time to pull out and leave billions of dollars in weapons for the fanatical muslims to use against their own people and maybe even America one day. Now, it's time to defend democracy again in Ukraine. Yes we are responsible for the democracy all over the world now. We have to show Putin who's the boss and don't forget about China. So I guess I'm kinda skeptical about everything because I have heard so many lies in 68 years. Joe Biden said we have to go, so I guess we don't have a choice but I wonder, does Joe Biden's son get a cut of the pie? After all he has an expensive habit to maintain and the military industrial complex has to be fed and.... Oh my God! I just realized that I'm on a rant! Sorry man.I apologize.

@hermitthefrog8951 2 ай бұрын

You ended too early. Please finish your rant!

@scottgodwin 2 ай бұрын

Epic rant in my book

@FooHawk 19 күн бұрын

Agree!!! EPIC and 100% correct. I finally understand after all these years. The USA is the evil empire. Too bad the Soviets collapsed. Only thing keeping us in check.

@Thermopylae2007 19 күн бұрын

That was a good rant!

@Giganova 2 ай бұрын

It's okay to be anti-liberal.

@hammer6198 2 ай бұрын

Absolutely!

@jacob_massengale 2 ай бұрын

But not anti-fascist?

@tantalus1210 2 ай бұрын

It's okay to be based.

@HeortirtheWoodwarden 2 ай бұрын

Anti which liberalism?

@Giganova 2 ай бұрын

@@HeortirtheWoodwarden Yes

@Coynepurse 2 ай бұрын

Race based nationalism is not inherently supremacist. In-group preference does not equal xenophobia or bigotry. Believing in a naturally occuring hierarchy of intelligence and character is in line with the scientific literature, not against it. Liberals seem to not accept all of what i just said.

@CRegensche1n 2 ай бұрын

At this point i am just done with any form of progressivism With the crises ahead we need sober pragmatism The ruling class will loose their legitimacy by not being able to deliver on their promises they have made

@robertholston4708 2 ай бұрын

I've never heard of this channel before. Where I am at currently is I still cannot believe the year that was 2020. I never bought into any of it even the slightest bit. At any moment millions of people in any state can be deemed non-essential and it will be a crime for them to go to work. The entire population can be forced to do things detrimental to one's health all in the name of safety. People can lose their ability to earn a living for themselves because they declined a pharmaceutical product. Nobody was ever held accountable for any of this. There is no indication that this won't happen again.

@Th3BigBoy 2 ай бұрын

It may feel like it, but you are not alone. Also, your comment is refreshing in a way, because I am also stunned that the duplicity we endured was just sort of "imagined" away.

@PhunkyPharmacologist 2 ай бұрын

If they try it again, it'll be their last mistake.

@hyperouranios_topos 2 ай бұрын

People will be replaced by bots and even feel grateful for it.

@jasonxie9041 Ай бұрын

This is probably the best summary I have seen on youtube on the distinctions between different trend of right-wing anti-liberalism and why making the distinction is relevant to our time. Good work!

@millerman Ай бұрын

Thank you. Please feel free to recommend it to others!

@jake9674 2 ай бұрын

There's something refreshing to even hear these views stated and acknowledged. The left tries to kill by ignoring and re-framing. To them, everything is a power game even discussion of the game. It's nice to see the territory with clear eyes.

@M1GPlutoski 2 ай бұрын

I'd caution against defining 'woke' as a left wing anti-liberalism. There is growing discussion on the left that this kind of identity politics is primarily for petit bourgeois neoliberals. There is an obsessive granularisation of *individual identity* over and above collective solidarity that acts as a kind of divide and conquer against any sort of widespread class action. "The working class is too male, too white, to hetero, too cis, too ableist" on and on. This reflects a move on on the nominal-left towards individualism, I would argue. Identity politics has very little to do with the material conditions of working people and more about the upward mobility of the middle-class. It does little if anything to actually challenge the structure of labour relations and just seeks to make the status quo more colourful. It seeks to elevate a few *individuals* from the 'marginalized' groups into the upper class of neoliberal capitalist society. The conversations around identity politics always have to do with the diversity of elite institutions or pronouns which does nothing to progress towards universal healthcare or increased wages for all working people, for example. More and more it's being recognized as yuppies cosplaying revolutionaries while they lecture and shame working people for not caring about the latest list of banned words and continue to exploit the very identity groups they proclaim to advocate on behalf of. You'd be hard pressed to find a factory worker that cares about CRT or a single black mother worried about being called a 'birthing person.' You won't catch Ibram X. Kendi arguing for anything that actually challenges power structures because then he'd be out of a job. Identity politics fits neatly into neoliberal capitalist logic where it gets packaged, marketed, and sold. If it was actually anti-liberal you wouldn't see every major corporation on the planet getting anxiety over their DEI score.

@Frennemydistinction 2 ай бұрын

This is widely known by both the old tankie left as well as third positionists, fascists and NS. Also, see the Amazon policy of creating "diverse" workplaces precisely to prevent unionization.

@M1GPlutoski 2 ай бұрын

@@Frennemydistinction That's what I mean by 'growing.' Only in the last 3 or 4 years have I seen this getting discussed in new left circles.

@BasedYeeter42 2 ай бұрын

If you read Michel Clouscard (OG French Marxist), you'll find that he basically predicted the rise of this neoliberal leftism 50 years ago

@rekit7351 2 ай бұрын

This is why I like Distributism. It's the only system that makes building a middle class its main focus. Distributism is the idea that productive assets in society should be owned as widely as possible. It wants to help ppl provide for themselves. "Three acres and mule" kind of thing.

@realismatitsfinest1 2 ай бұрын

@@rekit7351 Which will never work because some people will have shitty farmland while others get the best farmland.

@stellamaxwell777 2 ай бұрын

Very interesting! Subscribed

@ArmwrestlingJoe 2 ай бұрын

Young people go through many phases of political identity. I would say most of my teenage and early 20s I would’ve identified with more of a right wing disposition. I’m now 25 and have tried to read more widely and critic strongly held beliefs I once had. I’m now at a point where i dont view things like capitalism, consumerism, technology, or the idea of the “individual” in the same way I once did. I’m sort of in a political limbo currently but trying to sort things out.

@johnrogstad1278 2 ай бұрын

I'm a total layperson, so if I'm mistaken here, feel free to correct my interpretation: Both classical liberalism and contemporary identity politics liberalism (and more economically-focused positions like communism) are ALL just different forms of leftism. If they sometimes contradict each other, that's simply because leftism has grown so broad and diverse. But this isn't a super recent development. My understanding is that leftism emerged directly out of the French Revolution, when those in favor of the revolution sat in the literal _left_ wing of the National Assembly (their version of "parliament") and those in favor of the monarchy sat on the right. This bifurcation then just cemented virtually all political orientations in the West into one fundamental dichotomy: pro-tradition and anti-tradition. If the "anti-tradition" side went on to contain numerous apparent self-contradictions, that's not surprising, because it wasn't a singular philosophy to begin with. It was simply an anti-monarchy (and often by extension, anti-Church, anti-aristocracy, etc.) postion. And even though this anti-tradition movement proclaimed a distinct set of values at the time (i.e. liberté, egalité, fraternité), it is now blindlying apparent to us that these values taken to their extremes are not always compatible with each other. But this doesn't mean any particular ideology today is a "false" liberalism. For one thing, it's probably more accurate to say that leftism is the umbrella term and liberalism is a sub-concept of it. But more importantly, whatever you call it, leftism as a whole contained multitudes from the very beginning (including "classical" liberalism, but also the seeds of libertarianism, communism, identity politics, and many others) united only by an opposition to tradition. So it shouldn't be confusing or counter-intuitive that different lefisms today are incompatable. Because there are many ways to oppose tradition.

@jz8138 2 ай бұрын

I agree with what you said about liberalism being leftist, no criticism there. I would also add that liberalism in all its forms, communism, and fascism are all forms of managerialism and therefore none of those options are “traditional”.

@balderbrok6438 2 ай бұрын

You don't appear like a "total layperson", so I don't know what you are on about there. While I might prefer not to think in terms of a right-left dichotomy myself, what you are describing is the most grounded and technical way of understanding the dichotomy that there is.

@johnrogstad1278 2 ай бұрын

@@balderbrok6438 Well thanks very much. Many people today just seem to define whichever side they agree with using complimentary terms and the side they oppose using negative terms. So it's often just "whatever values I like are the values of the tribe I belong to" instead of actually looking at the historical origin and subsequent developments and evolutions of these ideas more objectively. But I'm definitely a layperson. I don't have any post-graduate degrees or anything. This is just basic internet research, some book reading, and a bit of reflection. So it's very possible I'm missing some key nuance.

@johnrogstad1278 2 ай бұрын

@@jz8138 I would partly disagree with this. I guess I'm not exactly sure what you mean by "managerialism" but the way I've usually heard this term used is in reference to government overreach. Which I think both sides have been guilty of at one point or another. I don't really see anything distinctly Left or Right about "managing" a country. Most of the increasing ability for governments to surveil and monitor their citizens in the present day has to do with technology rather than ideology imo. As for your examples, I would call fascism mostly right-wing. The appeals to cultural tradition, ethnic/social hierarchy, and its initial esteem of religion are very much in keeping with the "_right_ wing" that sprung out of the French Revolution (as I described above). I certainly wouldn't say that fascism is "left-wing" just because it was heavy-handed or "oppressive." Meanwhile, probably the most famous legal/philosophical arguments in favor of personal freedom would be the American Declaration of Independence and its Constitution. (Notably, these documents also argue for human equality.) This is clearly in keeping with the "_left_ wing" of the French Revolution, which of course also promoted liberty and equality in contrast to what it saw as a decadent monarchy. The contemporary confusion lies in the fact that a) leftism in general has been more successful and influential than right-wing ideas since these terms were born in the late 18th century, and b) most individuals and political parties today are various shades of hybridization between historical "left" and "right"-wing values. Even if most people claim to be exclusively one or the other. So the American GOP is framed as "right-wing" today but it champions individual freedom, gun rights, limited government intervention, etc. These values are actually mostly values indebted to historical leftism. Meanwhile, Republicans' promotion of traditional religions and families, as well as law and order and the police/military are certainly consistent with the original right-wing. I see "managerialism" more as a consequence of technology improvements and maybe a political "style" and less a set of ideological values as defined by a Right vs. Left dichotomy.

@johnrogstad1278 2 ай бұрын

@@balderbrok6438 Oh and I meant to mention that I sympathize with your reservations about thinking in terms of the Left/Right split. Certainly, it's better for individuals to try and assess particular issues, values, policies, etc. beyond the lens of this limited and sometimes distorting framing, but the reality is that we use this framing all the time and probably will for many years to come. For better or worse. So at least we should try and understand how it came to be rather than treat it like an inherent fact of nature.

@rodrigonegreteprieto8242 2 ай бұрын

Brilliant by any standard. I'm quite impressed by the mental clarity of thi guy

@millerman 2 ай бұрын

Thank you. I'm glad you enjoyed it.

@s2a1ha1j2a 2 ай бұрын

Thanks Michael! This is simple and useful.

@morezenthanzen 2 ай бұрын

It's ok to criticize Classical Liberalism

@zeenuf00 2 ай бұрын

Classical liberalism is a failure.

@cathomasuw 2 ай бұрын

When we've been told our entire lives that racism is bad, authoritarianism is bad, denying equal rights to different peoples is bad, stealing the resources and labor of native populations is bad. Almost everyone is fine with these ideas. Oh but it's perfectly good when they do it to us. Whether it's under the guise of Marxism, globalism, or Zionism. You have to pick one slavemaster because they make up the owners club, and you aren't allowed to have a team. They tell us every day what they fear most, the only thing that can meaningfully resist them. The only thing that ever has in the modern world. And we've listened.

@ArmwrestlingJoe 2 ай бұрын

Yes very interesting. It’s almost as if power is what matters most. I hope that’s not the case because life is too beautiful for power to be this important but it seems to be the case. The ones exercising power will express their will and demand your conformity. Israel is an ethno nationalist state which is everything I thought liberalism was supposed to be against yet here we are about to drop nuclear bombs to defend it.

@ArmwrestlingJoe 2 ай бұрын

I thought WW2 was partly to put an end to ethno nationalism so why would we defend it with tax dollars and military equipment

@realismatitsfinest1 2 ай бұрын

and under the guise of "climate hypocritical hysteria" (the sky is falling, the sky is falling ... you must not travel once a year to a warmer climate and you must eat bugs while we elites can still fly around the world in our private jets 4 times a week and eat steak for every meal)

@SSJKamui 2 ай бұрын

Your video is good. Ironically your explaination of the true individuals as the rare, exceptional and great, strongly reminds me on atlas shrugged and the fact that ayn rand stated, not everyone can be free or wants to be free, so lets concentrate on a few geniuses. (Ironically in a certain way, atlas shrugged is indeed rather christian in that regard. And famously, in another one of ayn Rands novels called anthem, the 2 people who want to be free end up hiding in a forest. And ernst juengers famous metaphor was the forest passage, which paved the way to his idea of the anarch. And ofcourse, among anarchists, the unabomber did a quite literal forest passage)

@Sapwolf 2 ай бұрын

I just kept to my Catholic religion, studied it over the years along with other religions, believe it, but also I've believed that American conservatism is more along the lines of Russell Kirk's Ten Conservative Principles. It meshes well with the human condition, good and evil, permanence and change, liberty and order, and prudence vs foolishness. It just seems to work well together along with the Founding. It is not so much conservatives angry at liberalism, but more anger at leftism. There's a difference.

@DrEhrfurchtgebietend 2 ай бұрын

You could explain this better using the three telos model

@555Trout 2 ай бұрын

The issue underlying this entire rant is "democracy". Caring at all about everyone's mostly uninformed and idiotic ideas.

@jacob_massengale 2 ай бұрын

Sure. But the reason democracies tend to be better places to live is firstly the ruler's constituency is large, creating insentive for good governance of that constituency, and secondly, information circulates better, as the freedom of the press allows the few good ideas to make it into the hands of important decision makers, instead of one hegemon dictator curating the narrative leaving things out that doesn't suit it. Read the dictators' handbooks: it explains a lot in a non judgmental systematic way.

@555Trout 2 ай бұрын

@@jacob_massengale You should start a magazine titled "Boomer Truths". Lol.

@jacob_massengale 2 ай бұрын

@555Trout and you'll always have the opportunity to think seriously

@amibrainwashed 2 ай бұрын

@@jacob_massengaleyou sort of set up a false equivalency here, or at least a very poor comparison. First off, freedom of the press is not an aspect of democracy. It is for you because you value truth. Democracy is mob rule, or better known as the tyranny of the poor. Freedom of the press, or more aptly free speech is only a democratic virtue so long as 51% of people value the pursuit of truth over the pursuit of power (i e. Vote buying). Of course if the only alternative is a dictator, then sure democracy would be the preferable option, but you're still dealing with two inherently tyrannical forms of government.

@jacob_massengale 2 ай бұрын

@amibrainwashed yes not all forms of democracy lend to freedom of the press or high quality discourse: it matters the kind of democracy and institutions you have. Mob rule and tyranny of the majority are a thing, though I'm not sure how tyranny of the poor works or if it has actually happened: appeasement of the poor might better describe trends. That being said, the principal stands that the larger the coalition, the harder it is to coordinate their interests and controll the narrative and the more diversity of opinion you are likely to have. Even if you have a mass produced narrative, their is still fairer competition for an audience, contrary opinions can still thrive, and politicians to some extant need to earn the ears of their constituency on a larger scale. When that constituency is at a small scale, politicians can focus entirely on staying in power and employ minimal actual governance

@luxnox9303 2 ай бұрын

I used to be a secular humanist, now I'm a hebrew isrealite accelerationist.

@brunoqueiroz2759 2 ай бұрын

Im a marxist leninist but i watch ur videos to understand the tought of right wing nietzscheans

@jacob_massengale 2 ай бұрын

The most important political divide in the future will be centralized authority and distributed authority. Legacy media vs. Social media. Fiat curency vs. Crypto currency. Nations vs. Neuro-tribes on the internet. Bueracracy vs. Blockchain peer to peer networks.

@juandelgadillo2656 2 ай бұрын

i cycle between galactic space fascism and posthuman anarcho-capitalism

@oli_steinn 2 ай бұрын

Hell yeah

@Frennemydistinction 2 ай бұрын

The former, without galactic and space, is best.

@brandonjones5815 2 ай бұрын

superb explanations. thank you.

@metafication 2 ай бұрын

Dr. Millerman are you graying or is your camera just higher definition

@millerman 2 ай бұрын

both

@metafication 2 ай бұрын

@@millerman there is no non-hater or non-weird response to make but best of luck lol

@OutsiderX7 2 ай бұрын

Very good video, Professor Millerman! Nice comprehensive summary of anti-liberal thought.

@jacob_massengale 2 ай бұрын

Conservatives believe economic prosperity and cultural hegemony are interdependent and mutually beneficial, which forces them to addopt some classical liberal policies in market settings. The far right believes economic concerns are subordinate to cultural hegemony.

@ArmwrestlingJoe 2 ай бұрын

With Internet politics there’s 100+ niche political groups to identify with. Are these any different than other forms of “identity politics” that half of these groups claim to hate? Does online political discourse have an impact and translate to the real world? Or is it all just a larp and a fantasy? I don’t know the answers but I think they’re interesting questions.

@victorygarden556 2 ай бұрын

Propertarian conception of rights are not, Agorism isn’t either. Those together allow real networks under consent agreements and basic etiquette cross culturally. It’s a functional change in my life once I understood how to work it and honestly I am around commies, militia types, everything in between.

@balderbrok6438 2 ай бұрын

I would suppose that it depends on which group one is refering too, specifically. "Duginism", as an example, is too inntelectually all-inclusive to really fit the mold of "identitiy politics", and while it's precice impact is unclear, it's not like it's unrelated to the activities of prominent geo-political actors.

@marshallodom1388 2 ай бұрын

I hope so. I'd be a hot mess if I tried living within circular logic, meme based, socially credited, uninformed, moral relativistic, and a meta-ethical philosophy so popular today.

@Firerose101 2 ай бұрын

Woke, also known as Social Justice or Identity Marxism, is a variant of Marxism that focuses on power dynamics and identity rather than wealth and class. Woke proponents perceive the world as a power struggle among different identity groups, while traditional Marxists view it as a struggle for economic resources among different classes. They advocate for redistributing power among identity groups to achieve equity and a utopian society. However, the woke ideology has been criticized for its illiberal and authoritarian tendencies. It often supports and justifies censorship, violence, and excessive government intervention, which can infringe upon individual rights. Additionally, woke thinking promotes a collectivist approach, prioritizing group membership over individualism. It encourages people to judge and treat others differently based on their identity groups. In contrast, liberalism upholds individualism and does not endorse censorship or violence.

@Musonius231 2 ай бұрын

I am a retired philosophy professor and I must say that I have enjoyed your program and have learned quite alot from your podcasts. I especially enjoyed today's "Are You Trapped in Outdated Political Thinking?" I am baffled, however, given your interests in political philosophers who cannot be easily categorized as well as your interests in mysticism, that you do not mention Simone Weil. In particular, I am surprised that you do not address her later political essays or her book The Need For Roots. Of course I have studied the greats, especially Nietzsche and Heidegger (my dissertation was on Kierkegaard), but ever since graduate school I have gravitated toward Weil in my political thinking precisely because she resists simple categorization. The late Diogenes Allen referred to her as an outsider. During her early Marxist days Trotsky thought she was a lunatic; in her later life DeGaulle thought she was crazy. She seems to evade the simple standard political categories completely. Sadly, because she is very idiosyncratic and not a "great books" author, she tends to be ignored.

@AgniFirePunch 2 ай бұрын

Dude......shut the hell up

@Brad-RB 2 ай бұрын

Left vs. right, individual vs. collective, progressives vs. traditionalists, authoritarian vs. libertarian, socialism vs free markets, instant gratification vs. deferred gratification, etc. I often wonder how personality, temperament, and embedded survival strategies shape our value hierarchies and philosophical preferences. The immutable traits randomly dispersed that initially made it possible for our species to adapt and thrive are now being weaponized politically against each other.

@xenocrates2559 2 ай бұрын

When I hear numerous approaches, that seem to me to be very different, all put on the 'right' I'm left with the feeling that 'right wing' and 'extreme right' have no meaning. I mean they have no conceptual content. They are reduced to signally 'I really really don't like that person' and nothing more than that. I think it is really hopeless to use right-left terminology as all actual meaning has been drained from it. (As an aside, I'm wondering about political thinkers like Confucius and where he might fit in this kind of discussion.)

@RedLetterRedux 2 ай бұрын

Great breakdown, thank you

@niccolop.carlyle4621 2 ай бұрын

Many academics virtue signal about being sophisticated and "nuanced," but when it comes to ideas they oppose, they often resort to painting with broad brushes, sweeping generalizations, stereotyping, etc.

@matthews7805 2 ай бұрын

I know guys like Vaush and Destiny aren't anywhere close to being academics, but they fit into that category.

@PeterJordansonn 2 ай бұрын

@@matthews7805Just like Piers Morgan and Ben Shapiro.

@matthews7805 2 ай бұрын

@@PeterJordansonn Agreed

@JHimminy 2 ай бұрын

@@PeterJordansonnthey’re not academics

@davidgreenwood6029 8 күн бұрын

@@PeterJordansonn shapiro dunking on college freshman is so intellectually pathetic, even when I agree with the ideas he's expressing, its just so weak. Democracy in the modern age will die without a large number of people embracing the responsibility to engage in discourse, in search of common cause, with those they are different than and disagree with. Even when people don't use strawman type tactics, debating one side is always lower consciousness, and strategically less pragmatically effective in changing minds, than true democratic discourse in search of unity with which the masses can wield power.

@necrosteel5013 2 ай бұрын

The main issue i find with the modern liberalism and mundane identitrainism. I care not for the historically "abused" because i know i do not like all people of a race, regardless of the race. I do not like all black men and women among the african americans. Exactly as i feel towards any race. And i am not ashamed to say it. I despise the people i do not like, and i know that the people i do not like come from any race. My stance on individualism is fairly similar to your stance on the right wing opposition towards the left. I definitely stand with any who prioritise that which is venerable and mastery. We are beings of capacity, will and stability in the face of chaos. We need true purpose, that is what i fully believe in. The leftist project their own degenerate minds onto what they believe the right to be, just as the right does to the left. The greater your principles, the more isolated you grow.

@drummersagainstitk 2 ай бұрын

What group undermines any Nationalist coalition other than their own? Thank You.

@Frennemydistinction 2 ай бұрын

That is such a key issue, but I fear it will never be understood but by a small number.

@nunoalvarespereira87 2 ай бұрын

Millerman is a member of that group.

@drummersagainstitk 2 ай бұрын

@@nunoalvarespereira87 Yes. I know.

@P.Aether 2 ай бұрын

The best thing about liberalism is that you are free to do all those things in your own property parameters and with the people who agree with you, and the state would no infringe upon that freedom. Unlike Russia, where the state will pursuit you for being different from the monolith whole they want to keep as an idea for everybody to follow

@crushinnihilism 2 ай бұрын

Unless you don't participate in the system, then you're thrown in a cage.

@vantagepointmoon 2 ай бұрын

Guess it was convenient while it lasted, meaning neo-liberalism, since it correlated rather well with the universalist post-industrial economics where everyone is an economic agent in a world of diminishing transaction costs. It was almost flipped on its head: boundaries are back, distinctions suddenly matter, the world is a lot less stable and definitions are all confused and garbled. But yes, that model was always detsined to run out of the road, the only surprise that it lasted for so long. Back to Plato to reconstruct the meaning

@davidgreenwood6029 8 күн бұрын

Democracy in the modern age will die without a large number of people embracing the responsibility to engage in discourse, in search of common cause, with those they are different than and disagree with. Even when people don't use strawman type tactics, debating one side is always lower consciousness, and strategically less pragmatically effective in changing minds, than true democratic discourse in search of unity with which the masses can wield power. Viewing the world in this way increases your sense of responsibility an complicity in what is happening, but is also a very good healthy strategy to cope with many of the things that are causing people strife and cognitive dissonance these days. The things we can all agree on, are the way forward. The things we all agree on, but the politicians and corporations disagree with us about, that is where our fight lies, not with each other, or really, outside forces.

@blooeagle5118 2 ай бұрын

Just study enlightenment philosophy and watch your world view crumble. Endeavour made a series called "Lies of the Enlightenment", and it's excellent

@cooperward-rc1sx 2 ай бұрын

Right wing anti liberalism definitely differs by the history and material conditions of a given nation/people. One reason it has remained in the niche in the USA is there has never really been right wing anti liberalism in the USA. Liberalism was supposed to be the glue holding together masses of people from different cultures and ethnicities. If there is to be a right wing bloom, people will need something to unify behind. Instead due to deep seeded liberalism, Americans tend to daydream about Neitzschean supermen, "neoreactionary" gooberdom, and other forms of internalizing liberal individualism

@Frennemydistinction 2 ай бұрын

To survive, the US will need a strong leader like Lee Kwan Yu or Bukele, maybe even like Putin. He will have to be non-White, also not anti-White. Not sure if that can ever happen.

@victoryovergravity 2 ай бұрын

This video is an expression of what I see as the fundamental problem we humans face today: the soul has been hollowed out of the human individual who is now a worker, a consumer, a lab-rat for socioeconomic and technological experimentation. The whole basis of my philosophy against liberalism is an attempt to conserve the soul. Not in a religious sense but in the sense that each of us is more than mechanics, more than that misguided computer metaphor of the brain could ever describe. To conserve the mystery and hierarchy of Nature!

@nikolaka1188 2 ай бұрын

So if there are few actual human beings, what are the rest of the species?

@villevanttinen908 2 ай бұрын

Good points,. Nietzsche and Heidegger were both elitist, and therefore also platonist, and when you are adherent platos noble lie, there is also secrecy involved. Is secrecy (seduction) necessity for vast majority of people ? I don´t know - maybe? But is this also means that mobs become very angry when they figure it (lie) out, how to avoid this? I think this was already Platos biggest problem. Nietzsche wrote mainly against Platos socrates ( dialectics) , but definitely not against platos noble lie. Nietzsche and Heidegger were also "nazi-thinkers" par excellence to my mind, "no question" about this. Maybe some can defend Nietzsche more than Heidegger against accusations, but not much. I think. You can of course read Nietzsche more like psychologist and thus closer to Freud (and more meta-psychologist) , but then you close you eyes from N:s "aristocratic radicalism" , his political dimension. One think is sure Nietzsche was not a socialist, and neither Heidegger, like you said. Many people would like to read Nietzsche ( and H) through red lenses but I think this is self-deception. Heidegger also was forced to change his philosophy after Germanys lost, I´m "pretty sure" about this? In his heart he never left Being and time? And nazi-party? You tried to defend N and H from nazi-accusations, but I think it is impossible. Nazism was one way to think Man again, like socialism, both were promethean movements, "new beginnings". And Hitler was very mythological character ( also nietzschean overman) , and one can say same about Stalin. Interesting topic this, and I agree you about beauty and truth, completely forgotten ones.

@kingdm8315 2 ай бұрын

What did bro say that he had to censor 😭

@vibrolax 2 ай бұрын

He used the word "pederasty"

@Tsmowl 2 ай бұрын

No. I'm trapped in a fortune cookie factory. Please help.

@JontJohnston 2 ай бұрын

Center right I guess yea ?

@JontJohnston 2 ай бұрын

Michael , we're are you on earth atm, deary me haha I need to sleep lol. And have you any content on oswald spengler?

@cadamham 2 ай бұрын

Separation of church and state and separation of economy and state. Government should protect borders, enforce contracts, protect individual rights

@Snoozelightable 2 ай бұрын

I use to be something, now I realize I was always no-thing.

@stanleyshannon4408 2 ай бұрын

True American conservatism is simply about small government, Jeffersonian, federalism. Each level of government exercising only those powers explicitly defined in a constitution, with all other power reserved to lower level governments. To be distinguished from Libertarian limited government, of course. There is no other conservative issue.

@Frennemydistinction 2 ай бұрын

And it held in its seed what we have today.

@stanleyshannon4408 2 ай бұрын

@Frennemydistinction I actually don't disagree. Although, I would quibble that it was sold to the states as being impervious to such abuse. But still, that original understanding defined American conservatism until the GOP redefined it after WWII.

@Sapwolf 2 ай бұрын

@@stanleyshannon4408 Actually, that redefinition after WWII was quite popular also with the Democrats. Back then, both the Dems and the Reps were staunchly into the Cold War and what is called neo-conservatism. However, that is NOT conservatism. Conservatism is against unnecessary and foolish wars.

@donaldseekins6516 2 ай бұрын

These are very interesting comments, but I think that liberalism is necessary to oppose the power of the (leftist or rightist) state, which in the 20th century turned into a horrific beast. Not only Nazi Germany but the pre-1945 Japanese empire. Not to mention less extreme forms of fascism such as Mussolini's Italy or Franco's Spain. During World War II, there were TWO Holocausts: one we know about, carried out by the Nazis, and the other in China and Southeast Asia, carried out by the militaristic Japanese.

@Brakka86 2 ай бұрын

"Millerman"... really gets the noggin joggin

@kingdm8315 2 ай бұрын

Danke

@oumod_ 2 ай бұрын

lol nice dig at Ronald Beiner at the end. That guy is pompous crank if there ever was one.

@Clarkjacksonfitness 2 ай бұрын

Yes I am. I still can’t get over they allowed women to vote

@hyperouranios_topos 2 ай бұрын

Classic liberalism is not an ideology, that's the actual way the world is functioning, according to Jordan Peterson. This is a compelling argument, since you cannot measure virtue, but you can bloody well measure economic prosperity and votes in the boxes. But quality will never equal quantity, until words have any meaning. So the question remains: shall we settle for quantity or try to look for something higher in our politics? Shall we be so hedonistic, scared and lazy to pretend that economics equals spirituality?

@IrisRainbowHeart 2 ай бұрын

I used to consider myself to be on the left and I would never have called myself a liberal but I guess I voted Democrat and now I can't stand liberals or democrats I feel like this whole woke thing has gone too far and people in general have completely lost their critical thinking skills

@lloydgush 2 ай бұрын

How's any of that right wing?

@swipesomething 2 ай бұрын

Make metanarratives great again

@familyshare3724 2 ай бұрын

Classical liberal here. Reborn anti-leftist.

@truthandpolitics6798 2 ай бұрын

check out candor intelligence

@Th3BigBoy 2 ай бұрын

What is that? A channel? Can you say it's full name?

@daffidkane8350 2 ай бұрын

Modern liberalism = socialism + capitalism. Business needs the state support and socialists need business resources so it’s a perfect synergy.

@nazbol84 2 ай бұрын

Left wing/ Right wing = Siamese twins

@ninoy4914 2 ай бұрын

Maybe some areas of "left liberalism" could be put into that description, but there are plenty left Liberal ideologyies that did not put this much focus onto Idenitity. FDR, John Stuart Mill (Yes, he did become a Left liberal) and John Rawls. Identity politics is if anything a reactionary tendency. There is much more to Left liberalism than just "wokeness" an annoying buzzword that refuses to die. You are in effect doing the same type of Strawman you argued against.

@thenorthowl2033 2 ай бұрын

Most of modern left liberalism comes from the interpretations from John Rawls that you dont have liberalism without justice. Hence social justice which requires the social groupings of people. "Second Principle (Difference Principle): Social and economic inequalities are justified only if they benefit the least advantaged members of society and are attached to positions and offices open to all." Maybe you can say if John Rawls was dictator he could perfectly determine who is least advantaged and who is not but in reality this principle immediately creates injustice through various interpretations as to who is disadvantaged and who is not.

@masscreationbroadcasts 2 ай бұрын

Amateur. I update my political thinking every 7 minutes, 10 times per hour. I've been doing this for enough time to have an ideology which wouldn't even exist for 6 months from now.

@markwarning7305 2 ай бұрын

No to drink but in many respects I resemble the pub-going racist. Kein Dasein fur mich. Not yet, anyway. Received by mail a used Strauss on Tyranny and it fell apart when I turned the pages but I only blame you a little for that. You make me think tis stuff matters. I may tackle one of your brow-beatling books, soon - your talks are tits!

@plumlogan 2 ай бұрын

I used to be a patriotic progressive. Now I'm an anti-American Duganist 😮

@Frennemydistinction 2 ай бұрын

He has racial hatred towards all anglos.

@FooHawk 19 күн бұрын

It does seem as though we need a very hard right turn. Congress is a joke.

@OrwellsHousecat 2 ай бұрын

❤

@IrisRainbowHeart 2 ай бұрын

Communism is always a bad idea 😢 I think the current version of progressivism is actually extremely regressive

@MrD_2112 2 ай бұрын

Sesrch: The rise of the jacobins! That's all you need to know. #UntilWeMeetAgain

@MagnusIratusLiberales 2 ай бұрын

much better than most videos but you still think anti mass immigration or pro men is white suppremacy or something. at least thats what you seem to be saying. hope that not serious.

@prismgems 2 ай бұрын

There isn't another form of liberalism, it is just that the term has been hi-jacked. The people who hi-jacked the term are not liberal at all, in fact their beliefs are contrary to liberalism. After listening to you, I think you are very confused. You are trying to put people under labels, and then arguing that they are different even though they are under the same label. That should tell you that you have muddled thinking. An idea should have a single label. The only reason not to is because you want to muddle people's thinking in order to manipulate or demonize or deceive them somehow. Did you even define 'left-wing' and 'right-wing'? I like Thomas Sowell's dichotomy; the constrained and the unconstrained. That is, the people who believe that perfection is not attainable, only continuous effort to do the best we can, and those who think there is some kind of perfection that can be achieved, and that they know what it is and how to implement it if only people would obey them. Let me illustrate with an example. Should men be able to pretend they are women if they want to? Sure. Should the rest of us have to play along with their delusion? No. Liberalism would be OK with these answers. But the people who have hi-jacked the term liberalism want to force everyone to answer yes to the second question. That isn't liberalism. That is a form of totalitarianism.