Debating Konstantin Kisin on the "Religious Left"

Clip taken from TRIGGERnometry. The full episode is here: • Can We Live Without Re...
For early, ad-free access to videos, support the channel at / alexoc
To donate to my PayPal (thank you): www.paypal.me/cosmicskeptic
- CONNECT
My Website/Blog: www.cosmicskeptic.com
SOCIAL LINKS:
Twitter: / cosmicskeptic
Facebook: / cosmicskeptic
Instagram: / cosmicskeptic
TikTok: @CosmicSkeptic
The Within Reason Podcast: podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast...
- CONTACT
Business email: [e-mail]
Or send me something:
Alex O'Connor
Po Box 1610
OXFORD
OX4 9LL
ENGLAND
------------------------------------------

[@hannotn]

Alex's position was far more coherent and consistent. Kisin was merely "the people I agree with don't do it, but the people I disagreee with do".

[@m0RRisC2319]

Kisin's position about apocalyptic left wing "religious" ideas in some cases is completely true though. As Kisin clarified, caring about climate change, is not "religious" but being so delusional and paranoid about the apocalypse that you resort to supporting the eugenics garbage of "overpopulation" (which is fake science that is thoroughly debunked) as a justification for reducing birth rates for example, can reasonably be classified as a "religious ideology" that has no basis in reality which is EXACTLY the claim that atheist's make about religion. How is that parallel not valid?

[@jmxtoob]

Alex also didn't need to claim to be outside or above the system. Konstantin couldn't understand that his position (e.g. pro-Elon, anti-Greta) is *exactly* the inverse and just as biased as his opponents

[@sammyismuff]

@@jmxtoob neither could he see his own anti-left bias, nor that this bias is the same type of bias that predisposes someone against Elon Musk. ‘Right wing bad’ is the same as ‘left wing bad’ just pointed in another direction.

[@Kris.G]

@@jmxtoob Konstantin was on point with the Elon/Greta example.

[@yayayayya4731]

​@@Kris.Gno he was not people criticize elon because he never delivered on his Tesla promises, is hypocritical, et etc etc.

[@validatedclassified2564]

I'm surprised ppl take this Konstantin guy seriously. He sat there with a straight face and said the left doesn't criticize Elon over his free speech absolutist hypocrisy. Konstantin is so deep in his right-wing echo chamber he didn't realize the left did criticize musk's free speech grift even before he bought twitter.

[@jonathansurovell3516]

Mehdi Hasan had a famous debate with Matt Taibbi, on MSNBC, that started over Musk's censorship of Indian journalists at the behest of the Modi regime.

[@joepiekl]

I mean you could tell when he said the people who criticise the BBC for being right wing as the 'very very extreme left,' whereas those who criticise it for being left-wing are 'mainstream centre-right.' That's absolute BS. In other words, the people who are on my side are 'mainstream' and people who are on the opposite side are 'very, very extreme.'

[@BDnevernind]

Absolutely correct.

[@MrGgabber]

Elon was worshiped on the left when he was pumping out EVs. Then he went slightly right of Mao on free speech and the left went insane

[@michaelhall2709]

@@Kwistenbiebel200That’s just echo chamber rationalization about your echo chamber. You’ve actually shed light on nothing at all.

[@cosmocoatl]

Steps to build a religion: 1. Throw soup at something

[@harman1957]

🙏😭😭😭😭😭

[@forestsunset9617]

Maybe in the future they can spread the word of the religion by door-to-door soup throwing.

[@LukeMcGuireoides]

😂 😂 😂 That guy is such a joke. A total grifter hack

[@estrathdee565]

It's how all todays major religions were started

[@lechevalier-ns2pt]

@@estrathdee565 chritianity started because jesus threw soup at the emperor’s face after being crucified.

[@95TRY]

Kisin’s entire argument is, “allow me to name call the things that I disagree with, so I don’t have to engage with them critically.” Disgusting. If you disagree with an idea, then say that and present your reasons. I hate the idea that we could label an idea as ‘religious’ make fun of it and walk away without even thinking about the idea.

[@nts4906]

100%

[@jacksonelmore6227]

Scientists spend all day labeling things, rather than engage with them “critically” Scientists “name call” the objects of their study, that they’d need not engage with them experientially They walk away without even fathoming the object of their study Yet you call this man disgusting, and champion your “reason” “Reason” is a name you call your god, that you’d not have to fathom what you’ve made your “god” I’d like to lovingly call you, in the spirit of good faith discourse: a Hypocrite and Pharisee

[@95TRY]

@@Kwistenbiebel200 You can’t be serious 😂

[@peezieforestem5078]

No, it's not. He explains exactly what he means at 0:31. Please listen carefully.

[@Ellyri0n]

It's about putting ideas or people into boxes so they do not HAVE to engage. If you start saying something cogent and they get the sinking feeling you might start to make sense, they need a reason not to listen to you. It's how they prevent ever having their minds changed.

[@calebr7199]

I always find it hilariously ironic when religious people disparage things and movements they don't like as a religion. As Kisin said, they mean something like dogmatic and fanatical, but if you are a relgious person using religion with this meaning, aren't you just calling yourself out as being fanatical and dogmantic?

[@zombi3lif3]

So true! Christian rightwingers using "religious" as a derogatory term against political opponents, is the perfect selfown 😆 Too bad the irony is lost on them

[@yankeefederer1994]

You might be right. It would be more accurate that those movements are cult-like, in that they cannot suffer outside criticism for fear that actual analysis would expose their inadequacy. Religions in one shape or another have had eras of cult-like activity, and could in theory operate like that again if not checked by modernity.

[@thomascromwell6840]

​​@@yankeefederer1994That's funny because while there is so much analysis on the left that every new text on a topic only adds to the complexity of its resolution, there is no analysis on the right at all. So which is more cult-like? The people who are constantly questioning their ideas and their consequences or those who don't do any of it? I'm reading a book titled The Right to Sex by Amia Srinivasan. A leftist book that questions current feminist narratives. A book by Andrea Dworkin that argues against porn pushed amidst people who believe in bodily autonomy. There is no such literature on the right with any analysis at all. It's because if you actually started using analytical techniques you will reach wildly different conclusions than you dogmatically believe.

[@yankeefederer1994]

​@thomascromwell6840 Those sound like fascinating books. I stand by the idea that the far left does have a cult-like inability to allow for disagreement. The far right does as well, the superiority of the left/right is not the hill I am attempting to die on here haha. Both have their value as magnetic forces to each other in my view. Based on the intensity of your statement, I can guess that you are not capable of steel-manning conservative thought on most topics. You're very clear in dismissing the right as incapable of producing anything of cultural value so you theoretically aren't missing anything. Cheers

[@soozofay1825]

It's also just a weirdly reductive definition of religion. "Oh, so you believe something that I think is unjustified? That's basically what religion is."

[@notavapor]

This Konstantin fella is very committed to his own dogmatic viewpoint. Kind of ironic tbh. Alex just shines a light on his irrationality.

[@Andrew-fy9wu]

Bollocks.

[@hsmd4533]

How so? Can you give an example? I saw Alex struggling and KK making his points with logic and examples.

[@VictorDodon]

@@hsmd4533 you seem to struggle with understanding basic ideas from a short video. Watch again the part about Greta Thunberg vs Musk.

[@hsmd4533]

@@VictorDodon can you be specific and give an example?

[@danw5760]

​@@VictorDodondo you honestly see musk and Greta as comparable? I want to understand why

[@andiwestcott7187]

I don't know a single left-winger who has not been incredibly vocal in their critique of Elon's so-called "free speech" position. there are troves of content made by talented communicators on the left making this exact critique, that Musk's position is nonsensical and ultimately hypocritical. it's incredibly dismissive and dishonest for Kisin to just say "nah but nobody on the left is actually saying that"

[@jw-ob1wv]

He made it clear in this discussion that he doesn't have any idea or any interest in what the broad left thinks. He's made a career out of having guests come on and bash strawmen of left wing positions

[@angloirishcad]

Alex himself says in the clip that free speech became a 'right thing'. Of course in reality its a liberal thing and always has been...its just that the woke left are fundamentally illiberal.

[@goodpol5022]

“Do you believe that the political ideology that you believe as passionately as I do my own is a complex super-natural belief system because you believe it a lot”

[@andrewhnorris1]

I think it's more correct to say that for many Veganism is both a lifestyle and an ethical framework; rather than just a diet.

[@BDnevernind]

It's obviously not a diet since it includes not buying leather and so forth.

[@grantm6933]

​@@Kwistenbiebel200he just needs to eat more vegan protein. There are plenty of vegan weight lifters who maintain high muscle mass on a vegan diet.

[@0num4]

@@grantm6933 This is true, but there is some nuance to it as well. I've known many athletes and physically-fit individuals who happened to be vegan while maintaining relatively high muscle mass. However, every person who I would consider "big" in the sense of muscle mass (at the largest end of the curve), whether I know them personally or not, is a meat eater--most often leaner meats such as turkey and fish. Animal protein is a shortcut in this case. It's not that vegans can't find sources of protein--it's that those sources are less protein dense and are generally more limited and less varied. You're never going to achieve the same density of protein through beans, spinach, or other protein-rich plants as you would through tuna, bison, elk, or chicken, e.g. Removing meat from your diet means you'd need to eat a significantly higher volume of plants to compensate. That alone has drawbacks including storage space, cost, availability, and preparation time. So yes, they exist, but there is a tradeoff that most body builders, power lifters, etc., choose not to take for good reason.

[@grantm6933]

@@0num4 some of this isn't true. Some vegan sources of protein, like nutritional yeast, are extremely protein dense. There are vegan, totally vegan weight lifters, who demonstrate that when you actually understand a vegan diet you can easily make it work.

[@yelsu3358]

​@grantm6933 why would you ever be vegan tho? animals are beneath us and our enjoyment is more important than their lives. I am gonna buy an extra steak tonight and have it in your honor

[@Wolfboy607]

"I'm not a conservative, I just think climate change isn't a big deal, and think veganism is part of a greater woke religion" What a couple of characters.

[@JimmyJacpots]

"characters" how very kind of you Wolfboy

[@kendonfahr8337]

That's not their argument. They object to the alarmism and the hysteria that can be facets of those movements.

[@filofilms]

But they are quite comfortable with the hysteria from people (like Musk etc) who are opposed to anything that may be referred to as woke. That too is becoming a religion@@kendonfahr8337

[@danielharrington5690]

Thinking that climate change is a "big deal" isn't a prerequisite to being a liberal lmaoooo

[@seanmurphy7011]

Climate change is absolutely dogmatic. Questioning it is not allowed. The term "settled science" is a dogmatic term, not a scientific term. This guy is not a character, but a caricature.

[@syph5646]

religion is when you throw soup on things.

[@forestsunset9617]

The C of E religion. Campbell's of England.

[@lechevalier-ns2pt]

Real and true

[@johnjameson6751]

Or glue yourself to things

[@russellward4624]

​@@johnjameson6751so doing things to get publicity is religion?

[@johnjameson6751]

@@russellward4624 Hard to tell. It is more likely to be stupid than religious.

[@makeitsimple9990]

They try so hard to look centrists and unbiased 🤣

[@MrGgabber]

10 years ago they would be left leaning centrists. That's just how far the Overton Window has moved

[@matt69nice]

Yet every time an actual opinion comes out of their mouths it happens to be right wing 🤔 Bro can barely contain his hatred of Greta

[@MrGgabber]

@@matt69nice because she's an ignorant person who actually holds political sway. She literally said she wants to go to net zero emissions by 2030, which most studies show would kill hundreds of millions of people. If that isn't religious zealotry, I don't know what is

[@DenKulesteSomFins]

​@@MrGgabberwhich studies show that net zero would kill millions? 🤔

[@KyotoSifter]

@@MrGgabber Actually curious, which studies?

[@bendybruce]

Claiming XYZ Is a religion, Is simply a new form of pejorative, which can be used as a tool to try and discredit a position you don't agree with. For example, flat earthers often claim people who believe in the scientific method, are nothing but religious zealots who pray at the temple of scientism. In and of itself, it's really nothing but a meaningless ad hominem, and if it is the strongest argument someone can offer, then they really have no argument at all.

[@matt69nice]

Just an attempt to write off people you disagree with without having to engage with them.

[@bendybruce]

@@matt69nice Exactly. I will certainly concede that there are some instances where such a claim is justified, such as for example when someone has become beholden to a cult of personality and therefore thinks that whatever their cult leader says must be true, but the term like many others has become grossly misused as a crude rhetorical weapon.

[@WillyJunior]

In AND of itself? Not just in itself? Not just of itself? In, as well as of itself?

[@Soraklee]

​@@bendybruceI think there are certainly instances where people call out specific groups as religious with real concern about their structure and methods in mind. However, I think we should move away from then immediately calling them a "cult" or a "religion" because that is in no way productive. What we should do imo is call it out as it is, as in "this behaviour is problematic because it endocrinates children" etc.

[@Perditions]

But we could say flat Earthers are in a cult., or that they're religious about it. It's not a weapon/cudgel, it's just describing how a thing appears. I think people tend to do this conversationally, not as an argument. If it needed examination people could get into it. If I say woke is like a religion, or is a religion, it's a language thing. To say Hitler was a monster is not to say he actually had fur and fangs or claws or whatever.

[@theskepticalskeptic1351]

Elon musk is making Jewish Question tweets and Greta Thunberg is the crazy one?

[@m0RRisC2319]

Oh my god people still claiming Musk was "anti-semitic" for calling out left wing jews who support "tolerance" of Muslim extremism after the October 7th terrorist attack are so full of shit. This is the same kind of crap that people try to pull about athiests like Christopher Hitchens calling them "Islamaphobic" for criticizing beliefs of Islam. No, criticizing the ideology of a demographic group is not bigoted. Secularists understand this besides when they pretend they don't just to call Elon Musk a Nazi like you just did. As Sam Harris once said, "Our problem is not against them AS PEOPLE"

[@joeylizotte7537]

Yes

[@christopherharry2139]

You’re not trying to argue she’s remotely credible and not a whiny, indoctrinated brat?

[@jakubzneba1965]

she is degenerate

[@cunever]

No

[@spawncampe]

I like how the right uses "religious" as an insult, but they're the ones that vastly uphold an actual religion(Christianity). You can't have it both ways

[@brandotheone]

Can you make some examples? All people saying the left is religious that I can think of I suppose they are atheists.

[@chesterdonnelly1212]

They should only use religious to actually mean religious.

[@GospodinStanoje]

Konstantin is an atheist, so what's your point?

[@Cross-Carrier]

That's because the more extreme ends of the progressive movement ( climate zelots, gender identity ideologues, CRT etc. ) are as dogmatic as groups like Jehovas Witnesses and Scientology with their excommunication, shunning, extreme language policing, having extremely rigorous rules where any straying from the group even slightly is intolerable. Extreme progressives are much closer to cults than the average Secular person or religious people. I as a Christian have much more in common with you than I do with an ultra progressive or a Jehovas Witness.

[@lillotusplays]

In the UK, the right is mostly secular. Id call myself a secular conservative. How many ppl actually go to church in the UK anymore

[@The-Panopticons-Progress]

I think Alex may be the most patient man in the world. I have seen him patiently discuss issues with numerous self-appointed geniuses, who say the most outlandish things, and he always stays calm. This guy "everyone who believes in something deeply, if I don't also believe it, is engaged in irrational religiosity." That is a useful metric to dismiss everyone without an inkling of thought.

[@oldmanwaterfall]

It's weird the entire premise of this conversation is Kisin saying religion is people having a set of beliefs which are impractical and irrational in service of some myth. No it's not, that's irrational and only potentially related to religion. Religion itself is a set beliefs primarily concerned with god, the supernatural, spirituality, human purpose, and can be potentially understood as prescribing some supreme importance to something.

[@MrGgabber]

True, his analysis was surface level. Doesn't change the fact that the left is just as religious as conservatives, they just substituted Christianity for a particular political cult

[@treeforged9097]

By your own definition wokism is a religion, the prescribed supreme importance is equity and it is a set of beliefs about why there is inequality in the world. Wokism is hugely concerned with human purpose, it is humans purpose to be inclusive and make sure that everyone has just as much as everyone else. Religion does not involve the supernatural, its only supernatural if you don't believe in it, and there are plenty of religions without a god.

[@MrGgabber]

@treeforged9097 correct, religion is not exclusive to believing in a God or gods, as even the idea of God is poorly defined. Any set of beliefs that humans believe will lead to meaning or purpose is a religion

[@starfishsystems]

A good counterexample of your characterization of religion is Buddhism. It's one of the principal world religions and yet it's not "primarily concerned with god" (there is no Buddhist god, nor a concept of worship) "the supernatural, spirituality, human purpose" (core Buddhist doctrine concerns the human CONDITION but doesn't suggest that there is any human purpose.) Taoism is likely another, but it defines reductive analysis even further. But I still think that you're somewhere in the right ballpark. Religions are a certain type of ideology, in a way that veganism or capitalism or hedonism, while certainly ideologies, are not. But what distinguishes that "way?" One marker is ritual, and closely related, I think, is institutional governance and social cohesion. These are old themes because religions are by and large very old ways for people to practice social cohesion. Religions are not famously based on rational analysis of evidence, but it's going too far to insist that religions must necessarily be irrational or risk being disqualified as religions. The idea of "scientism" is mocked by many religious believers (who seem unaware that they are offering a backhanded criticism of religion in general, including their own.) And the methods of scientific inquiry have no need of religious faith, quite the contrary. But, as a thought experiment, could some formulation of "scientism" properly qualify as a religion? It would not be old, and it needn't be irrational. But I think that if it involved ritual, social cohesion, and has some form of institutional governance it might qualify. I have no idea what it would look like, perhaps ritual racks of test tubes and labcoats, the handing down of the sacred deionized distilled water, calibration of cryptic instruments to holy traceable standards. But I can't think of a good cover story to motivate any of this. Religions may be followed, as often as not, for the sake of tradition, but there has to be some attempt at justification. Apart from enacting a theatrical pretense by way of celebrating real science, what is the justification for "scientism?" I'd rather just do the science, myself, and then take the rest of the weekend off.

[@albertcastro3500]

​@@treeforged9097this is precisely why wokeism is a religion, and a terrible religion at that, makes it damn near impossible to even communicate with those in the religion.

[@989Baron]

It's amazing how in denial these guys are. Konstantin is not just a conservative, he comes off as someone who's so completely and utterly immersed in the conservative ecosystem that he's never even heard an opposing opinion. It's like his entire conception of the left comes from reading boomer facebook memes.

[@Mopark25]

The irony 😂

[@BrianFinnegan-cn5mk]

What's your perception of the right?

[@BDnevernind]

It's pretty awesome to watch Alex point out these fools' hypocrisy on their own show.

[@johncarter1150]

Taken to task...

[@zhizn_snake]

I had no idea about this guy and his show... I watched this thinking Alex was the one interviewing them. 😂 He just takes over other people's shows.

[@embracedmadness]

@@zhizn_snakeif he was in the right of frame you wouldn’t think he was the interviewer 😊

[@forestsunset9617]

it's like watching a man debate with two dogs.

[@BMTroubleU]

How can you seriously have that hot take away from this conversation? What hypocrisy are you talking about?

[@matt69nice]

Kisins arguments are awfully dependent on a constructed notion of the opponent he believes actually exists. But based on what? A few columnists he doesn't agree with? People flaming on X? It's a strawman. Surely you can see the problem with him asking Alex to tell him what 'one of these people' would say about Musk is that it's a nebulous construct defined essentially as 'people who don't hold a rational position which is in opposition to my own'. But what he's failed to nail down is whether or not this is actually a significant number of people, and in fairness it ought to be compared to the number of people who blindly hold beliefs which align with his own. Surely the issue is not that there is some sort of 'religion', but that there exists a portion of the population which is uneducated and buys into emotional fear stoking and appeals to 'common sense' (which is just an echo chamber's in-group preference) rather than pursuing data and systemic solutions. Whether it's climate change or immigration, Kisin is just as guilty of stirring up his own 'religious' followers as is Thunberg, even just by his own logic.

[@nts4906]

The thing about right-wingers is they absolutely do not care about logic, reason, or the facts at all. That much is endlessly evident whenever anyone on the right opens their mouth or attempts a logical debate. The right wing has wholly embraced a rejection of education and enlightenment reason. It is core and fundamental for right-wingers to not trust anything or anyone but their own unquestioned dogmas and beliefs.

[@michaelhall2709]

@@Kwistenbiebel200And maybe climate activists - the overwhelming majority of whom don’t throw anything on anyone - take note of everything from the scientific consensus to a plethora of recent environmental disasters and conclude that climate change is a more pressing concern than, say, the issue of illegal immigration, which has been comfort food for racists and demagogues throughout recorded history.

[@brunoactis1104]

This is gonna sound highly partisan i guess, but what you say is the only way those kind of people can attack the left. They never have good arguments.

[@michaelhall2709]

@@Kwistenbiebel200 So what about all those climate scientists who went to school and wrote doctoral dissertations and camp out on the ice for six months at a time collecting ice core samples and other data? Are they brainwashed too? And, oh-not-brainwashed one? I’m 65, which means that my secondary education - yes! - was forty years ago. So you’re pretty wrong on this one, though I doubt that’s anywhere near the wrongest you’ve been just today.

[@michaelhall2709]

@@Kwistenbiebel200 So what about all those climate scientists who went to school and wrote doctoral dissertations and camp out on the ice for six months at a time collecting ice core samples and other data? Are they brainwashed too? I happen to be 65, so you’re entirely wrong in your assumption as to when I received my secondary education, though I doubt that’s anywhere near as wrong as you’ve been just today.

[@TheLooneyGhost]

its funny how he demands a specific example of elon musk being irrational when he never even provides a specific example of greta thunberg being irrational without being super vague

[@brainworm666]

They’re deranged. Konstantin knows his positions and the pitfalls of them which is why he’s so bad faith. The other guy I just feel a little sorry for. He strikes me as an imbecile.

[@Reggie1408]

lol @ the guy on the right claiming not to be conservative

[@machtnichtsseimann]

Agreeing with Conservatives on some issues does not make one Conservative. My agreement on kernels of truth with the Far Left does not prove me being a Progressive or especially part of the Woke Mob. Acknowledging truth should matter far more than a "lol" simplistic take on "the guy on the right". Lazy.

[@70chaoswalking07]

Just another fish in the "classical liberal" grifter pool

[@jamesinhenley]

why do you think he is conservative?

[@Kris.G]

he's a centrist. Not sure why you're LOLing....

[@donalddude7568]

​@@70chaoswalking07he is a 90s Liberal not conservative, in 90s he would be dunking on Christians.

[@ManGoatHamburger]

Thinking veganism is a religion is a religion.

[@ManGoatHamburger]

@@Kwistenbiebel200 thanks for letting me know.

[@tombombadil8709]

Then thinking that it is not a religion is also a religion.

[@ManGoatHamburger]

@@tombombadil8709 Everything is a religion, apparently.

[@MrBannystar]

Lol what are you rambling about? Are you one of those who also thinks that atheism is a religion?

[@tombombadil8709]

@@MrBannystar Is not any unscientific belief system that makes dogmatic proclamations and is entirely based on faith by definition a religious belief system?

[@realchoodle]

Woah the Kisin guy is absurdly uncharitable. It actually caught me off guard lol.

[@trax72]

From what I've seen from him, that's par for the course.

[@apothe6]

He borders on bad faith

[@BDnevernind]

He is absolutely driven by hate, and possibly nothing else.

[@markeggins890]

Ego?@@BDnevernind

[@forestsunset9617]

@@markeggins890 a clip of him at Oxford went viral. now he thinks he is one of the great minds of our time.

[@carlburnett5986]

Kisin says stuff with confidence like it’s a fact but it’s usually a load of bollox

[@amva55]

Is that dude the British Ben Shapiro, speaks fast and with confidence but what comes out of his mouth is garbage!

[@Kris.G]

@Kwistenbiebel200 don't expect any coherent answer to that....

[@Kris.G]

​@Kwistenbiebel200 This is not new on social media, though the fanboyism is particularly strong with this one. Just throwing their two cents out there and upvoting each other until there's enough dopamine to last until lunch time...

[@forestsunset9617]

throwing soup is more intelligent than anything he says

[@yancowles]

@@amva55I see him and the other bloke as more of the UK's dave rubin twins. They feature mostly (not always I will admit) right wingers and whose talking points they tend to uncritically accept but also have their own poorly reasoned positions such as we see in the video.

[@tangimeme]

This was a genuinely tough watch 😅 How do people not notice when their arguments sound that absurd as they say them? Or better yet, before they say them out loud? It's so bizarre, especially when Alex is basically pointing it out to them in real time lol

[@johnnypopstar]

Because this pair are grifting to an audience of right-wing morons. They're in the same group as "Dr" Jordan Peterson, Pim Tool, Ben Shabibo, Dave thingy the gay guy who didn't seem to realise half his audience thinks he should be hung, and that plant who always has a gun belt on his shoulder, whatshisname, you know, the "change my mind" guy. They're all the same.

[@dandare1001]

Kisin speaks fairly quickly and in sound-bites for the slow Right. Talk quickly, and your target audience won't have the time to digest and critique what you've said. Ben Shapiro is much faster, and more extreme, but he's also way more intelligent than Kisin.

[@brainworm666]

It’s likely because the “I’m not a Conservative” crowd are genuinely imbeciles

[@Readabookfoofoo]

You just agree with Alex. If you agreed and listened to Kisin, you would see the opposite. This is why you must follow both viewpoints.

[@Readabookfoofoo]

@@dandare1001you engage in slurs because you have no arguments

[@antygona-iq8ew]

Happy birthday Alex! Keep doing what you are doing. Your passion is inspiring and heartwarming.

[@MarcusA13579]

Equivalent of the Greta critics take on Elon Musk: “He’s open promoted antisemitic conspiracy theories (great replacement theory, George Soros nonsense) and claims to be a victim of censorship when called out on it.

[@PauLtus_B]

Cancel culture is a real problem when it ends up with people getting fired over something they said 15 years ago they no longer stand by. Repeatedly making certain arguments and getting negative feedback which you then refuse to honestly engage with to then lose some of your audience because of it is just the exact freedom the supposed anti-cancel culture people claim to be opposed to. Most of the time people claim cancel culture is happening it's just the latter but they pretend it's the former.

[@carlmango11]

No no, apparently the "left" just hate him because he's a billionaire and "not one of them".

[@simonvetter2420]

I find it funny that he says Elon's inconsistence on his extreme free speech bs would not be a critique of the left when that was all Twitter talked about for weeks when he took over and implemented one insance policy after the other. I guess any valid critique simply cannot have come from the left (or be bipartisan) in his mind, even if he has to stick carrots in his ears and thumbtacks in his eyes to ignore evidence of the contrary.

[@fantuswitt9063]

I mean George Sorros has funded a lot of left wing organisation and causes but he is not the sole reason for all social change and he is probaly less evil then ignorant about the people he puts his money in as he has lost oversight in old age.

[@ashspeaks1]

@triggernometry key to success is to repackage the same right wing tropes with the pretence of an open mind. Episode after episode they literally repeat the same talking points. These tired old talking points are like commandments for their "religion" that their audience need to hear and be reassured after having their faith tried by the evil guest. Can I get a Hallelujah?

[@kgsws]

I feel like they got, as some people tend to say, "triggered" and had to create show with "trigger" in the name as some sort of ... revenge?

[@jaybird1731]

Aye man.

[@hjonirving8435]

they are a perfect example of audience capture.

[@perthomsen8708]

It's amazing to me that these two pseudo-intellectuals can rise to the level of fame they have. As you said, they are retreading boring right-wing tropes, while strongly claiming to be in the 'heterodox center'. Phony. They are very similar in this regard, to Adam & Sitch. There seems to be a market for these more milquetoast conservatives, presumably for the folks that can't make themselves support the explicit right-wing populism that is sweeping Europe and the US. They are effectively the same, but they fig-leaf behind this fake intellectualism.

[@markeggins890]

Rogan is doing the same now.

[@skusami2548]

I really like Konstantin, but having watched the full interview I do feel that he was a little dismissive and condescending to you. On more than one occasion he essentially resorted to 'ah you're young you don't get it'. It felt like a bit of a cop out. Did you get that sense at all Alex?

[@noorzanayasmin7806]

What if it is the case that Alex is young so he did not have as much for sight who has lived longer. With age comes wisdom. Alex has shifted his views in a lot of things has grown internally. I am sure he will continue to grow in his belief.

[@derfliv206]

​@@noorzanayasmin7806nah, screw that. You engage with arguments, not superficial traits.

[@jjreddick377]

That’s the rightwing version of “ you can’t understand because you’re not a x”. We’ve lost the art of true debate . The wings of the political spectrum are far more similar epistemologically than people want to admit

[@dansattah]

@@noorzanayasmin7806 But why should you bring up age in a formal debate? Those arguments frequently lead to ad-hominem fallacies.

[@nts4906]

@@noorzanayasmin7806 Age brings the degeneration of your mental capacity and loss of passion and energy for life. There is a reason the best and smartest people are not geriatrics. The idea that age brings wisdom is a lie to console the old as they degenerate mentally and physically towards death. I am sorry but wisdom is guaranteed to no one, especially the lazy and the stupid. Reason and the pursuit of truth bring wisdom. Literally nothing else matters.

[@kappascopezz5122]

It's really strange how he identifies throwing soup at things as a religious action. We already have a better word to describe that action, it's called protest. I would define religion through a number of criteria, but "protest" aren't really amongst them. What I would have considered a valid point to some extent would be to talk about dogmaticism. If you look online or in discussions, it is indeed possible to find leftists who practice dogmatic thinking. What I think distinguishes them from what is literally called religion rather than just metaphorically is that the leftist dogma consists of ethical foundations like egalitarianism, while the religious one also consists of truth claims at its core. It is basically the difference between saying "I will never accept torturing children no matter which evidence you present" vs "I will never accept that the earth is flat no matter which evidence you present".

[@nts4906]

Exactly. There are dozens of better ways to criticize these movements than trying to falsely label them as religious. Apart from the fact that they are obviously not at all religious, it just makes it seem like he has no actual criticism. Even when we criticize religion, we should do so with specifics, not just religion=bad/wrong.

[@treeforged9097]

Throwing soup is not protesting it is vandalism, that act had no effect other then humiliating anyone that gets lumped in as an activist. Siting in your room and taking a dump in your pants is protesting if that is what is considered protesting. Divine command theory is an ethical foundation that is far older and more established then egalitarianism is. Wokism at its core consists of truth claims such as women get payed less money for doing the same work because of the patriarchy. That is a fact claim, it just so happens to be empirically factually false. its not online that you hear these factual errors such as the wage gap being used to justify there belief system, its people like Bell Hooks, Emma Watson and even Barack Obama who are making these factual errors in the name of wokism. Its a religion because no matter how much empirical data contradicts your beliefs, you still persist in believing in them. We can scientifically prove that women are not getting paid less money systematically to the same degree that we can prove that the earth is spherical but wokist still parrot the talking point like a prayer.

[@jacksonelmore6227]

Not “strange” at all

[@zombi3lif3]

@@treeforged9097 Vandalism is a common tool in civil unobedient protesting. The reason why leftwing protesters do vandalism, is because it is what's most effective at hitting rightwingers, conservative and propertyowners, which are the ones standing in the way of leftwing changes, like fighting for minority rights, fighting climatechange and fighting animal cruelty

[@OmegaF77]

@@zombi3lif3So throwing soup at priceless paintings of tortured artists is the best way to fight the right? No, you're just making yourself look like a clown and your point will no longer be listened to by the people. They will now forever associate green legislation/environmentalism with the dumbasses that do this shit.

[@calebm5131]

What I think is really telling here is how Alex basically gets them to admit that the only thing they care about morally is the economy. They recognize that AI may be a threat but when imagining a future where the economy relies on it they concede that they would try and protect it at that point. It's like if they agreed ingesting mercury is bad but also said they'd fight for it if it was the UK's main import for that purpose in 10 years.

[@tdb517]

Hahaha

[@davidjames9908]

What?! People die in economic crashes, I’d say it’s moral to defend that. The over thinking in these comments is painful.

[@calebm5131]

@@davidjames9908 My point is that it's seemingly his *only* concern. Yes, any economic crisis hurts people but clearly there are more factors than that to consider. This is precisely why you have to "overthink" these issues, because believe or not there could actually be worse cases than a country's economic collapse. AI risks, like climate change, may be *existential*. Some solutions to these problems are not helpful due to their economic impact, as Kisin points out, but that doesn't mean that *any* solution which harms the economy must be discarded.

[@GigglyardoYT]

if veganism is a religion, then not wanting to harm dogs is a religion

[@FormulaProg]

That's vegetarian. Vegan is obviously extreme,

[@ellev11]

Drop the arbitrary perception and you get pro-animals. @@FormulaProg

[@rgghjs9270]

​@@FormulaProgextreme in what way? You need to drink your oat milk on a snowboard or something?

[@Retired_Vegan_Activist]

@@FormulaProg🤣

[@FPSIreland2]

@@Kwistenbiebel200from Kisins definition of religion it is. Not wanting to harm dogs is irrational, what if you need to eat? Not wanting to harm dogs is also impractical. Many working dogs get harmed while working, though it would be impractical to not prevent a terrorist bombing attack because you didn’t want to put dogs in harms way. It’s a religion but not because it’s a sub idea of veganism, but because of the definition given by the guy you’re below every comment defending.

[@WildXstElementZ]

I’d suspect the right is more conservatively religious Edit: I watched the video. They didn’t mean the initial meaning of religious . So I guess what I said could be considered in correct

[@garythefishable]

I also suspect that water may be wet.

[@Killian91703]

i suspect the sky might be blue

[@SamoaVsEverybody814]

Duh

[@fuckamericanidiot]

Makes sense, conservatism and extremism are literally impossible to combine.

[@benjamintrevino325]

I think most of the religious-speak coming from the right is just virtue signaling.

[@stephenholmgren405]

50k views and 1.2k comments. The engagement on these conversations are outstanding 👌

[@REVOLUTIONREVEALS]

Keep up the good work Alex!

[@mikhail2001]

This wasn’t worth your time, Alex.

[@Kris.G]

lick his a$$ while you're at it buddy

[@mikepeace6363]

I’m sure we’re all glad to see him reveal holes in their ideas though 😅

[@RufusTodd]

The problem is that we all still watched it.

[@spewter]

@@RufusToddI’ve very happy to read a comments section that is united in seeing Kisin’s nonsense. He usually gets a lot of support for his terrible views

[@dandare1001]

It was definitely worth Alex's time. You need to listen to and understand the motivations of any extremists, sorry moderate centrists like KK and the other one.

[@nedsantos1415]

Sorry...I can't take Konstantin Kisin seriously when he says "climate change has every element of religion."

[@nedsantos1415]

Without laying out a commonly agreed set of "elements".....

[@billhicks8]

It's actually insulting to both climate activism and religion. On one hand, climate activists aren't relishing an end times, aren't expecting belief on faith, aren't pointing to any text but peer reviewed science. On the other, religion is a personal belief, expresses comfort through subjective revelation, and is based on something generally and historically outside or beyond material concerns.

[@billhicks8]

Both are being trivialised to buff up some pose of "rationalism" that says more about the shallowness of the one making the comparison than making any educated point of understanding

[@davidjames9908]

Straw man. He didn’t say that, he said the ‘doomerism’ around it. Honestly, this comment section.

[@nedsantos1415]

@@davidjames9908 He did actually. Lying about what he said diminishes your argument...or the lack of it.

[@Steventrafford]

Great work Alex, I enjoyed the last interview you had with Kisin. I’m glad to see in this clip you forced him to take positions and show his blatant bias. This isn’t him just talking about his views personally. I can’t wait for the whole video to drop.

[@adamgates1142]

It's very telling that religious people always use religion as an insult...

[@machtnichtsseimann]

That's not the point, although it is understandable if it sounds strange to you. We're talking about a political movement of Leftist Marxism. It doesn't announce itself as a religion, yet it operates as such, or worse, as a cult of extremist Woke mobs who love canceling people's careers, influence librarians to put their age-inappropriate books into children's schools, want to control speech or else, are love their Anti-White Racism while wanting to take us back decades to grouping people according to skin color. So, it's a good thing to call it out as "a" religion ( not all religions are equal in belief-truth statements ). And, BTW, if you truly don't know, non-religious individuals like John McWhorter and Jonathan Haidt and Jordan Peterson have been calling the extreme Left / Woke for years now.

[@brianmoren3780]

Generalization.

[@lechevalier-ns2pt]

@@machtnichtsseimann take a snickers. KZbin comments get deleted by glitches all the time

[@machtnichtsseimann]

It's not always telling. When calling out the Woke as being a part of a religion or cult, it is a cross-sectional analysis. A religious person can tell another person who is religious while claiming not to be, i.e. it's only politics. Not true. And especially if a Woke person is railing against Christians for "legislating their morality", when the Woke want to legislate their own version of morality. Otherwise, religious people are mixed with the usage of "religious". EX: For many Christians, it's come to carry a connotation of previously bad experiences in the Church, although they still believe in God/Christ. So, they use the "spiritual, not religious" description. Others are perfectly fine and secure in saying they are religious.

[@hah-vj7hc]

But there is no religious person in this video

[@FCDFansChannel]

The classic I’m not a conservative yet pedal right wing narratives, this grift is so 2015.

[@MrGgabber]

The timeline is about right. 10 years ago he would be a left leaning centrist, but the window has flown far left

[@thomascromwell6840]

​@@MrGgabberHe would not be left leaning fifty years ago. Read a history of labour. You people are such consistent liars.

[@itsjayswelly]

​@@thomascromwell6840 the guy you responded to is all over this thread defending kisin, he's a fanboy

[@bladdnun3016]

@@thomascromwell6840 I think most of them are not lying, but genuinely ignorant.

[@jw-ob1wv]

​@@MrGgabber Were you around 10 years ago?! Kristin's position kn immigration would have been considered far right then. Because conservatives have drifted further right over the past decade, he gets away with making his positions seem centre right. I don't disagree that the left has moved left on social issues but looks up the history of the labor movement and you will see that overall the left has become far more moderate

[@The-Panopticons-Progress]

Have none of these people heard of ideology before?

[@ciaranconsidineuk5847]

What's the difference between ideology and religion at the end of the day? They are both based upon faith and believe even way.

[@thomaskamkar5197]

@@ciaranconsidineuk5847 I'm no expert, but I suppose it's a matter of fundamental truth claims. Religions inherently declare something that is supposed to be true about reality, and build an ideology around that, while ideologies don't inherently need that framework.

[@Wingsaber]

I love that Alex never seems to come into a discussion confrontationally. He sees it as a discussion and treats it as such, thinking about what the other person is saying and responding respectfully and genuinely. A lot of people (I'd argue Konstantin included) just come into these types of discussions seeing them as arguments from the jump, and you can tell that from the way they conduct themselves

[@hah-vj7hc]

True. I like Konstantin a lot, but he fell into tribalism in this one

[@richardlee3679]

A lot of people in this comment section are doing exactly the same thing. Nothing in this clip seems confrontational to me and yet people in the comments seem desperate to make it into an Alex VS Konstantin situation where Alex 'totally dunked on' the other guy. It's literally just a conversation where the participants don't fully agree on their views. Is that considered confrontation these days...? Good grief.

[@mattygroves21478]

7:35 *""but you have to say this other bit [about criticisms of Elon Musk] otherwise this doesn't make any sense."* The fact that Kisin is unaware of the criticisms of Musk speaks volumes, and confirms Alex's point.

[@jpe1]

Did anyone bother to define what they mean by “a religion” in the full video? Certainly no definition was offered in this clip. I can’t imagine a meaningful definition of religion that would be able to include veganism or “wokeism” (whatever that even is…) Overall a rather painful discussion to watch, given the glaring lack of meaningful definition of the topics of discussion.

[@jonathansurovell3516]

Also no knowledge of climate policy.

[@BanAaron]

Konstantin and Francis both struggle to give any definitions in the entire interview tbh. I suspect it is because deep down they know they can't truly defend what they are saying. But they don't want to lose face so they skirt around definitions

[@themaskedman221]

Religion is kind of like good art: no one can describe it, but they know it when they see it. Unfortunately, everything people "think" they know about religion is wrong, and defining it is harder than it seems. People like O'Connor and Kisin, who play philosophers on KZbin, get around this by simply ignoring it. In ancient Rome, "religion" or "religio" included paying taxes and voting in addition to worshipping the gods, but in Medieval Christendom the Roman meaning became obscure and was rarely used at all. It wasn't until the 15th Century, with Platonists like Nicolas of Cusa and Ficino, did "religion" start to mean a doctrine or belief rather than practice, and also something distinct from political and economic affairs. This definition that's most familiar to us is also the most recent, and doesn't make much sense when you leave Europe or the West. Scholars now tend to use either substantivist or functionalist definitions, but the former (which focuses on gods and the divine) makes little sense outside the West, while the latter (which focuses on what religion does and how it works) can be so vague that pretty much anything can be a religion: veganism, woke-ism, Marxism, nationalism etc. Under a functionalist definition (which Kisin is using without explaining), you could also throw Western political religions in with "woke-ism" - such as American civil religion -but to do so would confound the neat little dichotomy between "secular reason" and "religious irrationality". People like Kisin adhere to a worldview where religious belief is always irrational, which is why he is quick to label anything he _thinks_ is unreasonable as a "religion." The fact that neither Kisin or O'Connor bother to define religion with any rigor is why they're able to talk so freely and casually about it.

[@zombi3lif3]

They are just parroting talkingpoints feed to them by other rightwingers. No thinking needed

[@Kris.G]

Why would you define something that's been defined ages ago? Do we need to define the word "definition" too? There are many depending on the context and I know exactly which definition they're using based on the discussion.

[@terry9819]

Konstantin really starts ranting and raving when when his unsubstantiated beliefs are challenged, not a good look.

[@forestsunset9617]

always looking for his gotcha moment, but actually a poor debater with a big head.

[@fuckamericanidiot]

I kept up with every word, I didn't hear any raving.

[@thehelpfulwalnut7440]

In reference of the irrationality of AI doomers vs climate doomers “Elon Musk is not Greta Thunberg is what I’m saying” I don’t think that comparison is as favorable to the AI people as you think, Konstantin.

[@themaskedman221]

He's right in the sense that Elon Musk isn't a 21 year old girl. But he's wrong to assume that Musk's fear of a robot apocalypse is more rational than Thunberg's environmentalism. It's objectively not, but since Kisin is himself in some "anti-woke" cult, he's incapable of seeing that.

[@treeforged9097]

Elon Musk actually knows how AI works and Greta knows nothing about the climate. Musk is an expert on AI and Greta is an expert on being exploited publicly.

[@JD-wu5pf]

​@Kwistenbiebel200Yeah, it's crazy that Musk is losing an immaturity contest to a literal teenage girl. Dude throws more hissy fits than most toddlers I know. But hey, at least one of the most wealthy individuals on the planet has the emotional restraint of a six year old.

[@johnnypopstar]

@Kwistenbiebel200 > high IQ [citation needed] [weirdnerds.png] Musk is an absolute child and so are you if you can't see it. It's blindingly obvious that he's an imbecile. Also, do try and learn what "IQ" is, and how it doesn't _actually_ mean what you presently think it does.

[@thomaskamkar5197]

@Kwistenbiebel200 "High-IQ academic" Musk has never publically taken an IQ test, and he only has a bachelor's degree from 30 years ago. If that qualifies him as "academic," than you use the term a lot more loosely than I do.

[@Wertbag99]

If you have a definition loose enough you can just label everything a religion, and apparently being a religion is a bad thing (always a strange point when a Christian makes it). It's using the word in a way that no one recognises, that its just holding opinions, and therefore everything from your favourite movie to the sports team you support is a "religion". Meanwhile everyone else continues to use the word to mean the organised following of supernatural entities and ideas, and are just confused as to why people want to force other unrelated topics into the same category.

[@hah-vj7hc]

This was a conversation between three atheists, if you didn't notice

[@williamdavies5957]

I dont know how anyone looks at the climate studies and issues and thinks that wanting more done is religious? I cant see any world where in 20 years times we think climate protesters did too much

[@brainworm666]

Ultimately the position of people like Konstantin is portrayed as being about the now and how society functions right now. That is tangentially true, but the real reason is that this is simply a position of selfishness. You are quite correct that nobody in our future who is dealing with the consequences of our madness will think they (climate protestors) did too much. If we continue on this trajectory it’ll hardly be surprising if we are actually eco-terrorism. And I think future generations will be quite right if they hold that same hypothetical opinion.

[@JF-zv4oc]

4:14 Not only the “extreme left” think that the BBC has an inherently right wing bias due to its staffing choices: Laura Kuenssberg - Tory apologist-in-chief Nick Robinson - president of young conservatives, Reappointment of Robbie Gibb Theresa May’s former comms director, presiding over a ‘culture of fear’ where govt criticism was made very difficult, Andrew Neil - Spectator editor. If there were this many high profile people from the left we would know about it and the Tory press would never let it lie.

[@john70689]

4 people makes it right wing? Out of how many employees? They have lots of staff that support Labour too, hence why some right wingers will say it has left wing bias.

[@JF-zv4oc]

‘4 people’? I’m not sure you understand. We aren’t taking about the catering staff here. These people have a huge influence over the direction and tenor of the BBC’s political output. Don’t take my word for it. Look up Emily Mathlis’ testimony on the subject - a very prominent journalist here in the UK who was forced out of her BBC role for speaking up on these issues. She delivered a very compelling talk on this subject which I’m sure is on KZbin. Unfortunately for everyone the Tory govt has its in last dying throes reappointed Robbie Gibb just to twist the knife for another few years.

[@Letmedoubt]

Even if I don’t agree with Alex on this one it’s so great these conversations are happening. Keep up the good job guys!

[@dalek604]

" but that's not a position someone on the left would have." These guys aren't serious.

[@TheHuxleyAgnostic]

China, btw, has lower emissions per capita. It's ignorant to compare the total emissions of 1.4b people to the total of 330m people. If you add up the totals of all the countries above China, on a per capita emissions list, you have a comparable total population putting out higher total emissions.

[@fuckamericanidiot]

Who is blaming people? Just you.

[@martijnijzerman2309]

And also, a lot of Chinas carbon emissions is industry for the West, so its hypocritical to blame China when they make our products

[@yn7751]

On per capita China's is lower than the US, equal to EU, higher than individual European countries including UK IIRC. And yes thats after adjusting for trade

[@TheHuxleyAgnostic]

@@fuckamericanidiot So Alex was dumb, to bring up people who say "whatabout China"? Those people don't exist?

[@zombi3lif3]

Also, USA and the west have had high CO2 emmisions for 150 years, while China have had high emmisions for a couple of decades. Lifetime CO2 budget for China is way below theire fair share of the 1.5 deg temp raise, while USA is close to theire share of a 4 deg temp raise

[@sophie800]

Happy birthday Alex. 🎂

[@twilightcharm275]

Happy Birthday 🎉☺️

[@NathanSmartscherer]

Konstantin Kisin says he's not a conservative but every clip I see of him is him saying something that conservatives say.

[@kurteisner67]

He's the "I'm not like other girls" of the conservatives. Quite pathetic, if you think about it. At least people like Dennis Prager or Ben Shapiro don't pretender to be centrists.

[@BrianFinnegan-cn5mk]

When your so far left everything looks right wing.

[@NathanSmartscherer]

@@BrianFinnegan-cn5mkwhen you’re so centrist that you lend your platform and speech entirely to the right and critics of the left.

[@BrianFinnegan-cn5mk]

@NathanSmartscherer I'm centre left and I follow him. Yes a lot of their content is criticizing woke culture, but u don't have to be on the right to criticise this woke nonsense. There are plenty of sane people still on the left who don't believe that men can have babies, strange right?

[@calebr7199]

@@BrianFinnegan-cn5mk Criticizing "wokeness" makes you right wing. Hating trans people is a reactionary position.

[@benphelan6361]

Konstantin is unintelligible. Just says ridiculous things constantly.

[@Nathanatos22]

100%. There are a few people out that just make me feel my IQ drop on a visceral level. Ben Shapiro’s one them-and now there’s this guy. Maybe let’s stop platforming stupid people.

[@tonycooke3982]

Maybe you have an issue with basic comprehension 🙄

[@cobracommander8133]

I don't particularly care for the guy but I wouldn't say all that. He's perfectly intelligible, I just don't always agree with him.

[@BDnevernind]

This is just conservatism from a conservative who doesn't want to admit it. Take out all the weird winging about being mislabeled and he is "intelligible" as someone with basic right-wing and anti-left views.

[@hippipdip]

He suffers from both-sidesitis. Except in order to position himself in the middle he needs to pretend the right is a lot better than they are and that the left is a lot worse.

[@DandyDandy]

Wait, is that the Doglas Murray Book "The strange death of Europe" in the background?

[@tomasdowbor1184]

Found this conversation frustrating at times (not this clip but in the whole 1hr video on their channel, specifically the discussion of meaning as finding one's internal highest or fundamental value). Just felt like Konstantin was missing the point while acting very smugly, lol. Like ok, he excepts that there is no objective standard for meaning (counting blades of grass can be meaningful if it is your true value, although I am a bit skeptical on if he actually believes this because he seems hold a belief that people are likely incorrect about activism being their true meaning but whatever), so meaning comes from acceptance of ones internal highest or fundamental value. But where does that come from, he seems to state that it is something you discover rather than choose, but this just seems to be some spiritual unfounded claim, where my main problem wasn't even that it's just an unfounded claim, but that it seems as though he doesn't think it has to be defended or proven in some way. He says things like "you just have to experience it and you will then understand". This just seems quite ridiculous to me and when pressed on it they seemed to just flounder around some distinction between desire and value without really making any substantial distinction. The distinction sounded like, value is when you desire something thats actually good while desire is hedonistic. Perhaps they would have a better distinction but I did not hear it. The point of contention should obviously be, ok, I will agree and say we don't desire this fundamental thing, we simply value it. Why do we value it? It seems like they are backed into some position of either biological or spiritual determinism where there is some true fact about who you are and what your most fundamental value is on a biological level or from your soul, that can give you meaning and you must discover it. But I don't know if they would actually admit that this is where their view takes them, though maybe they would, I am not sure. Anyways, finishing my incoherent rant now, was just a frustrating watch but who knows, maybe it makes perfect sense and I am just going crazy, lol.

[@tomasdowbor1184]

This clip was actually quite frustrating too though. It seems he is defining a religion or a religious character as anything with a group sentiment that makes people act in a way I disagree with. As if it is logically impossible to be both a super anti AI/Elon Musk person and have rational beliefs on the matter. Anti Greta Thunberg people aren't religious because their reasons for disliking her are correct and rational but anti Elon Musk people are religious in this respect because their reasons are wrong and irrational... Just seems a very silly and subjective defintion

[@daikucoffee5316]

I’ve never meet an honest or smart right winger in my life.

[@johnnypopstar]

If you want a "frustration chaser" for some reason, see the time they had Sam Harris on. They're _so_ dumb it's painful.

[@vintinoo1924]

The Right is way more publicly religious.

[@fuckamericanidiot]

*openly

[@MrGgabber]

Publicly? Maybe, though there are a lot of open Socialists

[@l3eatalphal3eatalpha]

Performatively.

[@jacksonelmore6227]

Depends what you mean by religious

[@asdf1991asdf]

Hahaha what! The progressive left are going through a religious phase right now and have been for the last ten years at least. Just because one believes in their causes doesnt mean the behaviour and ethos of the left is religious. And i think religion is inseparable from human society and nature, and so i accept the lefts current metamorphosis as part of a historical cycle

[@limoverde9846]

How can you even pretend to be the reasonable one when you won't even engage with the arguments on the other side because you won't even acknowledge them? So one sided

[@themeta6096]

I think you make really good content, and even though i dont agree with everything i like the way you reason it. I would love to see you debate someone more in the direction of jordan peterson, andrew tate or even someone like chris williamson. I loved the debate you had with ben shapiro!

[@gordonstrong5232]

Someone should tell Konstantin that Tim Pool already snagged his "I'm-not-a-conservative-even though-I-pander-to-them constantly" grift.

[@Mopark25]

Not everyone feels the need to slap a label on everything, shocking I know

[@gordonstrong5232]

​@@Mopark25 Hi Konstantin

[@bourbonyoung6237]

Speaking of people acting impractical and irrational! Conservativism and Apologetics! Nothing is ever learned by stoping at ‘No’ and ‘don’t change’. It’s ‘irrational and impractical’ to develop a site designed to maintain these foundational beliefs. Particularly when it relies on populism and resonance despite the evidence.

[@juansqh]

*A general overview:* *The Comparison of Beliefs with Religions* *Veganism and Religion:* The question is raised whether veganism, in certain manifestations within society, resembles a religion. This point opens the debate on how strong ideologies or beliefs, such as veganism and "wokeism", can take on characteristics similar to those of religions. This includes having a set of beliefs that motivate irrational or impractical behaviors in service of an idea with an almost mythical power over individuals. *Climate Change "Doomerism":* Described as a belief with all the elements of a religion, highlighting irrational behavior in service of an apocalyptic idea. *Artificial Intelligence (AI):* It is discussed whether concern for AI could be considered a religion, concluding that it currently is not because reactions and behaviors towards it are not as extreme or irrational as in other movements. However, it is suggested that this could change if the perception of AI's danger increases significantly. *The apocalyptic nature of ideologies:* Many of these concerns (climate change, AI, veganism) have a core of scientific or ethical truth, but the way some people act on these beliefs is compared to apocalyptic cults *Presence of a moral framework:* It points out that a central component of any religion is a moral framework, and discusses whether movements like wokeism have a clear moral framework, unlike other topics like AI. *Criticisms and Public Perceptions* *Perception of AI and Environmentalism:* The concern for AI is compared with environmental activism, noting that although both are based on science and legitimate concerns, the method of activism and public perception can vary widely. The conversation suggests that environmentalism is seen by some as demanding unachievable economic sacrifices, while concerns about AI have not yet provoked a similar public reaction. *Comparisons with Public Figures:* The conversation mentions Greta Thunberg and Elon Musk as examples of how different groups perceive activists and entrepreneurs. It discusses how criticisms of these figures often reflect more about the critics and their own ideological positions than about the public figures themselves. *The Nature of Beliefs and Activism* *Scientific Foundations vs. Cultish Behavior:* It is emphasized that many of the concerns discussed (climate change, animal cruelty, AI risks) have solid scientific bases, but the way they become the focus of campaigns can take on almost religious or cultish tones. The Impact of Actions and Activism:* The effectiveness and rationality of certain activist actions are questioned, such as stopping funding for humanitarian aid programs to focus on AI safety, or demanding unachievable economic sacrifices to combat climate change. *Free speech and platform responsibility:* The issue of free speech on social media platforms is discussed, arguing that absolutism in free speech is impractical in the real administration of these platforms. *Future Concern Over AI as a Movement* *Forecasting protests against AI:* It is anticipated that concern for the dangers of AI could lead to extreme actions in the future, which could be seen in a similar way to how environmentalist or vegan movements are currently viewed. *Conclusion and Perspectives* The conversation reflects a exploration of how certain contemporary ideologies and movements can adopt characteristics of religious fervor, how they are perceived and criticized by different sectors of society, and the complexity of evaluating the rationality and effectiveness of their methods and objectives. This analysis covers not only the beliefs themselves but also the public perception of these, debates about their practicality and rationality, and the influence of public figures in these movements.

[@YoliSamli]

Great ! Thanks

[@magaluzzzon]

Super sir

[@andyforteeel]

Cool to follow the vid 👏👏

[@Sourcoolness]

Tell Chatgpt thanks

[@jpe1]

Which AI generated this?

[@cartergammage1540]

Can we give some appreciation to the absolutely fantastic lighting?

[@hah-vj7hc]

No, but every one's gonna criticise bad lighting though. That's how it is when you're a media producer

[@apolloforabetterfuture4814]

What even is a religion? Is scientology a religion? Also climate change is a serious threat, those protests are reasonable.

[@jzargo1709]

Climate change is real; the protest where they block the streets is not reasonable, however

[@Regrettedink39]

I think religion is the deeply rooted belief in a figure or figures? Idk for sure though

[@hectormata449]

Climate change is happening all the time. We’ve had three ice ages followed by global warming. It’s a very slow process, like thousands of years. The alarmist like Greta Thunberg barely out of the womb are doing the chicken little sky is falling hysteria. Now, being concerned with trashing our environment in a global scale is enormous and that is a more serious problem for our immediate concern.

[@noorzanayasmin7806]

It is not matter of if climate change is serious or not. It is the matter of how they approach it and even if you bring up fact they do not care about it. They want fossil fuel to be shut overnight. If you say the consequences of that will be the world falling apart but they dont want to listen to it. So the reason it is called religious because it has become dogmatic. Protesting for climate change for the sake of protesting because it makes you feel fuzzy inside thinking you are making a difference which is same as religious.

[@OrionDuCros]

Climate change is a religion.

[@ClannCholmain]

George Carlin, both his parents were born in Ireland, once described himself as hard left, and said the left is interested in people and the right is interested in things.

[@noorzanayasmin7806]

I think this is not the correct conclusion. I seem to see both side are very well concern with people but right tend to be more concern about the well being of their closed nit tribe/family while left's concern for human seems to be global. Left worry more about making sure people feeling are not hurt. And the right is more concern with duty and personal accountability. So the left is Feminine while the right is mesculine temperment. Right are more worried about preserving tradition while left are concern with breaking down berrier and new ideas.

[@fuckamericanidiot]

The hard left is interested in children.

[@brandonl129]

@@noorzanayasmin7806chronically online take

[@ClannCholmain]

@@noorzanayasmin7806 I’m not aware of any standards or accountability on the right. Particularly in neither in the United Kingdom or the United States. It’s basically nothing more than tax cuts for the already super wealthy and using distractions like drumming up fear of for example foreigners and homeless people. And of course attacking trans people for being, trans.

[@ClannCholmain]

@@noorzanayasmin7806 I’m not aware of any standards or accountability on the right. Particularly in neither the United Kingdom or the United States. It’s basically nothing more than tax cuts for the already super wealthy and using distractions like drumming up fear of for example foreigners and homeless people. And of course trans people for being, trans.

[@kschacherer92]

I get so incredibly bored of anyone pathologizing their outgroup - i have heard enough of these for several lifetimes. konstantin is doing that here. kind of dismissively too.

[@matt69nice]

B b but how are you supposed to deconstruct your opponent unless you arbitrarily make them a convenient monolith?

[@davidjames9908]

I’m incredibly bored of people not recognising antisocial behaviour as a form of pathology.

[@norwalltino]

Intelligent discretion from Alex at the beginning of this interview. His analogies are actual and right on the spot. Nobody can kick him down. He is prepared and equipped with knowledge My hero.

[@themonsterjack]

This is a huge change after watching the Dave Farina vs James Tour debate.

[@foxmocs6443]

Kisin’s argument is baffling. Everything came down to strawman arguments about how people who disagree with him are irrational, he’s right, therefor religion.

[@jonathansurovell3516]

Some of the things I don't like about Elon Musk: he censors journalists at the behest of authoritarians, and he promotes extreme bigotry, like people claiming Jews are fostering hatred against whites.

[@ClannCholmain]

He unashamedly got a leg up on the back of an unregulated mine in South Africa.

[@jasonsmith4114]

When did that happen? Never. You're lying.

[@BDnevernind]

He treats workers like crap, especially black workers. He takes credit for other people's accomplishments. We're such crazy leftists to care about such things. Absolutely irrational.

[@BDnevernind]

He treats workers like crap, especially black workers. He takes credit for other people's accomplishments. We're such crazy leftoids to care about such things. Absolutely irrational.

[@raskolnikov3799]

@@jasonsmith4114 stfu. Not every criticism against your emerald-barren Daddy is a lie. Billionaires are not your friend.

[@somethingcleverandironic]

I love how every centrist is able to see the world "objectively" and completely free from from ideology. They know they are outside of Plato's cave as the rest of us argue about the shadows passing by on the walls. Amazing.

[@LittleMAC78]

Less than a minute in and wondering would 'dogmatic proselytization' be a more fitting term for how people approach certain things that others mistakenly lump in with 'religion' due to the manner in which the person's view is presented?

[@bendybruce]

Claiming doomerism with regards to climate change is a religion, is a pretty absurd stretch. I think it would be far more accurate to claim it as a philosophical position, which of course doesn't mean it is the right position to take, but again, claiming it as a religion seems like a demonstrably incorrect thing to say. In fact I think by doing that you are saying more about yourself than you are about the accusation.

[@tcritt]

There's a dog loose in the wood.

[@JNB0723]

I would say its not even a philosophical position but an empirical one. The evidence is there, it is just do you trust the scientific community (which is international btw)...

[@bendybruce]

@@JNB0723 I appreciate your point of view on this. I think I'm arguing philosophical inasmuch as it takes a particular position with regards to humanity which is to say not a particularly good one. I think we risk debating semantics in as much as I tend to agree that Doomers have quite a lot of evidence to support their position. I would stress it's not a position I hold for philosophical reasons :)

[@johnnypopstar]

Similarly with the "AI" thing. No, reputable people _do not_ think we're on the cusp of creating _actual_ Artificial Intelligence, not on the surface reading of what that label _should_ mean and _does_ mean in most laypeople's heads. All we have in LLMs and all these fancy image and video generators are pattern recognition and extrapolation engines which, _yes_ are some part of "intelligence", but _no_ are _so far_ from being the whole picture that it's comical when uninformed people act as though they're evidence that we're about to birth _real_ intelligence. Nobody will be making Morpheus' speech/exposition-dump in the real world any time soon, and by "soon" I'm talking on "decades" scale. We're no closer to "AI" than we've ever been, because we still don't know what shape it needs to take.

[@StuntpilootStef]

"Woke-ism has a very clear and delineated framework" I'm sorry what? People can't even define the term. The way in which it's used just means anything on the left.

[@hah-vj7hc]

Wrong.

[@StuntpilootStef]

@@hah-vj7hc Great reply. Full of content and explanation. But you can redeem yourself by defining woke for us. You have the floor.

[@hah-vj7hc]

I am a heretic, duh. So why would I need redemption then? Because you are a (we/us)? Well, I'm a (normal/human) though, off to the gallows with me, huh?@@StuntpilootStef

[@StuntpilootStef]

@@hah-vj7hc I'm a straight, white cis man, this has nothing to do with demanding something for being LGBTQ. Also, nobody has ever been prosecuted/fired/murdered for being straight. But people definitely have had that done to them for not being heteronormative. I'm saying woke-ism isn't clearly defined. You say I'm wrong. But when I ask you to clarify you come with this verbal diarrea, so what is supposed to be my takeaway from that other than that you also have no idea?

[@S.D.323]

@@hah-vj7hc o no god no the humanity not the gallows

[@brainworm666]

"I'm not a Conservative, I just happen to agree with the core ideology."

[@khaderlander2429]

I agree with Alex on this, any orientation or view points that advocates for a way of living is a religion, those ideas bind you to your group. Because a person's orientation determines their behavior, determines their activities and the level of existence they may rise to. One presupposes the very thing they are trying to prove because their orientation is built into their justification and legitimation of their choice.

[@johannfaigle3105]

I don't think the argument for comparing new trends on the left to a religion was well made here, but I do believe it can be. I think it's something that suffered from becoming a slogan, something (I thnk) alex talked about on a podcast with chris williamson. Much, or at least the loudest part of the progressive left today act in a manner that resembles unshakable religious belief, being impervious to evidence that would challenge their claims and treating any form of dissent as heresy. Questions or honest criticisms of any of the many prescriptions put forth will have you quickly branded as a moral deviant, rarely, if ever, engaging with the actual argument. The meme of "Everyone I don't like is hitler'' is way more accurate than I'd like it to be. Of course, the same could be said for "everything I don't like is woke'', but that does not make either side less stupid. Some arguments also only work if you accept 20 prior premises, many of which are not backed by any evidence, sometimes are mere statements and not arguments, or can be shown to either be false or way too incomplete to proceed without question. Then you also have the redifining of words in order to fit a specific narrative, or at the very least an aggressive concept creep. To me, John McWorther sums it up best, and while I don't have the exact quote, it's something to effect of "religious beliefs will come to a point where you're required to stop using logic, where you cannot ask questions, and must just accept what is said''. So while it may lack other aspects of a religion (such as god per se), it does ask of its followers to behave in a way that is reminiscent of religion. That gets summed up as "Is religion" and becomes a lot more complicated to defend. All that said, I do not think the comparison to veganism is even remotely close, nor that the left is unique in this behavior (after all, the very analogy is to religious beliefs, and sometimes cults) but it is often what is most front and center today.

[@saicharand7765]

Is there some dogma on the left ? Sure. Thing is, dogmatism is a feature, not a bug, of right wing/conservative ideology. You have to believe ‘traditional’ ideas/values are unquestionably right to be a conservative. It’s why religion goes so well with conservatism… And I’d like examples of the broader left (not a few people on social media) being ‘religious’ i.e holding onto a belief dogmatically purely on faith amid a lack/contrary to evidence.

[@johannfaigle3105]

​@@saicharand7765 I don't disagree that conservatives are more likely to follow a religion. I don't think, however that you need to have unquestionable faith in your political beliefs to consider yourself on any ''side''. I'm not sure what you would call the broader left here, and maybe I expressed myself poorly. I don't mean "the left is religious" as a general statement that would encompass anyone with left leaning views. I also think the whole 2 sides thing is not all that useful if we're pointing out specific behaviors that are unproductive, undesirable or just.. shitty. It really does not matter "where" it comes from. I understand why the distinction is made, hence why I still use it, but the issue is not which side it comes from. Like I said, the loudest part of the left, what today would be called progressives, or "woke", or "far left'' is what I'm pointing out here. So no, I don't think that anyone you would consider left leaning acts in this manner, or blindly follows these things. I consider myself to be left leaning, tho I have views that would put me closer to right leaning. The issue here is not "who are the specifc people doing this", it's that it's become widespread, for too many reasons for yt comment, and the supposed academic foundation/arguments/rationale for these ideas are very often: a product of biased or incomplete research; questionable; or in a number of cases demonstrably false. And the whole point of the scientifc process is free exchange of ideas, but when the refusal to do so comes baked into the theories or is practiced by its proponents...well that's not a very good thing is it?

[@brandonl129]

on the off chance alex sees this, what’s the obsession with legitimizing and platforming so many “anti woke” rage baiters?

[@matt69nice]

My theory is that he's trying to expose them. This clip is particularly unfavorable imo because it's quite transparent how partisan these 'centrists' are. Same with Douglas Murray - came frequently to the cusp of breaking the man but not quite doing it, edging it so he could continue to expose how faulty his arguments are. Just a theory, anyway.

[@brandonl129]

@@matt69nice i mean that’s cool and all but it gives them a perceived credibility that’s undeserved

[@treeforged9097]

@@brandonl129This is the internet, there is no credibility. If you perceive a random guy with a youtube channel like Alex as being credible then you have to stop being so gullible. Constantine has been on CNN and the BBC, he has more national airtime then Alex does, if anything they are giving him credibility.

[@sabelotoda2]

It seems that you are not very familiar with Alex, although he does not get on the super "anti-woke" train. He has always been very critical of that woke position and has cordial relations with people like Jordan Peterson. Alex is on the left, but Alex is not. "woke" seems to be that a large part of his audience is super woke and they don't know that he is not. It will make me laugh to see in a few months when you stop following him and accuse him of being a fascist or some such nonsense.

[@RichardsGaySon]

He might be attempting to convert them to his side. Befriending the enemy may actually be a decent strategy if you want to de-radicalize them

[@geekexmachina]

A question which is not always highlighted is what AI is going to be used for and there maybe moral questions in that. For example if it is used in providing and analysing data in decision making what level if control or supervision is required. Even processing benefit or grant information or even social design and building planning could have strong implications on where and how and if people live. Personally im not certain either way but you can see where people can get upset. Films like logans run are still remembered by the older generation and Wall-E a slightly younger

[@Whoknowsuknow]

Climate change should be an exciting opportunity for us to move away from harmful and unattractive pollutants. Instead it's being treated as an unwanted obligation..

[@TomFarrow-oo5wm]

It's very telling that he said it is "objectively" good that Elon Musk has opened up the Overton window to the right on X. Most people on the left think it is objectively bad, because in their perception he hasn't opened the window to the right, he has shifted the whole window that way. Just because we say that our favourite opinion is "objectively" good and our least favourite opinion is bad, doesn't make it so. It's a shame Alex didn't know any of the more left wing critiques of Elon Musk as I think it would have really opened the conversation up onto more interesting ground.

[@Szaam]

The Triggernometry guys still sound very much like the "anti-SJW" crowd from 2016.

[@Zleec]

I keep getting impressed by Alex, it's almost uncanny how skilled he is.

[@jamesthecat]

I would just suggest an historical comparison for the (quite likely) extrapolation of current AI fears by Alex: that of the Luddites.

[@ballisticfish1212]

Konstantin can’t just label every movement or cause that people are passionate about as ‘religious’ as a means of dismissing it. Some people actually strongly want to make an impact on the world and not just make snarky comments on podcasts😂. For him to seemingly dismiss issues like climate change purely due to some of its members being a bit irrational is silly

[@treeforged9097]

There are religions people who strongly want to make an impact on the world, thats actually a prescription of Christianity. The fact that there are serious people in wokism trying to make an impact on the world is evidence of its evangelical religious nature.

[@ballisticfish1212]

@@treeforged9097 I think you misunderstood my comment

[@geraldbutler5484]

@@treeforged9097Are you thick? What is this wokeism thing you have latched on to? I am a progressive person but I’m not into wokeism, whatever that is.

[@francisp2131]

@@treeforged9097define wokism

[@Rich_H_1972]

Simply can't take Konstantin Kisin and his mate seriously. Sometimes they make a bit of sense but they are just locked into a specific worldview, which is exactly the kind of thing they don't like about the people they criticise.

[@saltoftheegg]

I'm glad the taxi driver from that first episode of Sherlock found work after the show.

[@Readabookfoofoo]

The focus in these comments about where Kisin is politically, right or left, proves a separate point- “the right” aren’t the only people calling social movements of the day religions. Classical liberals, e.g. Taibbi and Shellenberger, Bill Maher, etc. coded left until 2 or 3 years ago. Now they code right. And why? Because a religious orthodoxy is forming on the left. It would be just as correct to call Maoism a religion, or Bolshevism, or Nazism. You will be left in the middle, or crushed into their shape, if you are a rational person and you chase the ideological orthodoxies of the Left. Calling these things religions are merely ways of understanding and delineating them from other Western political movements.

[@hank.hacking]

I can't imagine how hard it must be for Alex to talk to Konstantin. The man is just incapable of viewing anyone with a different opinion as sensible. No amount of deference from his interlocutor helps him realize what a hyperbolic knob he is.

[@russellward4624]

So Komstantine just admitted religion makes people act irrationally.

[@JoshuaGabaldon]

I hate watching people debate who constantly mistate others' opinions and beliefs as their core arguments. It assumes at the very least a potentially false premise. Alex is good at untangling it after, but it makes his argument appear stronger than it ever really is.

[@831Billy]

Watch him on Decoding the Gurus

[@dragoonsunite]

The fact that he's a con artist with an overvalued evaluation in TESLA which manufactures an abysmal fraction of the cars in the world, but has a market cap worth more than every other car manufacturer combined, despite barely operating in the green, delivering every single product late they have ever announced, and nearly every major feature and advertisement point that made the brand unique falling short of promises, self driving is not here, automated robo taxis never happened, the notion of self driving cars at the level he pretends they would exist by now is not even close to being delivered on by Elon Musk... And that's just TESLA. Solar Roofs is mostly a scam as well, and you can look at the number of units delivered, nevermind the fact that the entire demo was staged and he lost in court big time when challenged on it. Or we can look at the mis-advertising of Space-X which was supposedly going to have people on Mars, what, two years ago? They have a lower reliability then the Space Shuttle program they were supposed to replace and are operating in the red. He takes credit for PayPal despite his only accomplishment there being that he was fired and they went on to be extremely successful despite him leading to him profiting only because of his share holdings. What about his robotics? Advertising being the most advanced modern robotics company despite the fact that they are grossly behind most leaders in robotics, you need only look at Boston Dynamics... I guess we could also look at the dismal failure that is the hyperloop, the entire thing is a scam, and all of the hyperloop projects have shut down basically. Or we could look at the Boring Company, which bores tunnels at a tenth the speed of other tunneling companies for ten times the cost, despite his claims that it would be "revolutionary." I will give him credit he was at least on the site for OpenAI but it seems much of their progress was despite him, not because of him. Finally, about the only thing left, and the only project that isn't a net loss for him "seems" to be the neuralink stuff, which is showing some medical promise and possibly more in the distant future... But that's one thing out of SOOOO many other problematic ventures. Nearly everything he does is flubbing, and you think that criticism of him has no objective basis? They're living in a dream world of self-deluded confirmation bias. And that... None of that has ANYTHING to do with Twitter acquisitions, or just the abhorrently stupid shit he says sometimes, which is just another layer on top of it all...

[@geraldbutler5484]

Doing alright isn’t he.Solar is the best thing since sliced bread. Won’t clean cities be grand!

[@dominikivankovic63]

nicely explained how he scams and lies continuosly to inflate value of his stocks. This constant lying and putting unrealistic goals (like that he will put a person on Mars by 2022 to name one of many) leads to poor working conditions. What he nicely masks as a "hardcore working philosophy" usually is just the abuse of workers which are put at a extreme overload to reach those goals. There are many articles online about this in every company he led. Like workers doing 12 hour shifts 6 days a week, workers fainting because of tiredness, ambulance arriving more than 100 times in one year in one Tesla factory. Workers in Tesla having 30% more injuries than all other car companies in the US combined, poor safety regulations and not providing proper education on safety, workers also not wanting to report their injuries because hourly wage for a injured person would drop from $22 to $10. Not letting the workers unionize (for obvious reasons), violating numerous others labour laws like not allowing workers discuss wages or working conditions,.... basically he exploits his workforce to the maximum (for personal gain) and the articles about former workers of Musk is infinite, as is the number of workers which don't work for him anymore (also for the obvious reasons). Unrealistic goals for putting people on Mars is creating very similar problems now at SpaceX. The other thing I dislike about him is his "God complex", he will save humanity, or his inventions will. He invests a lot into self-propaganda. He presents himself like a genious inventing new things 24/7, like he is the mastermind behind all the products his companies make, when some podcasts and media start spouting obvious Musk propaganda, presenting him like a new Tesla, it makes me wanna throw up. If anything he is more like Edison, taking credit for everything, but inventing almost nothing himself. You can find online the testimonies of people with whom he led first the paypal (there they kicked him out of board) or Tesla when he first invested into company and was one of three ceo's, the other two guys who actually founded Tesla and made first prototype got cheated by Musk badly. This, along with your comment, would be mine left wing critique of Elon Musk in short, which I know, no matter on how many pages I tried to elaborate it, will be dismissed many times as just a simple jealousy of his billions (some people can't fathom that not everyone sees in ultimate life happiness in billions/amount of money)

[@dominikivankovic63]

nicely explained how he scams and lies continuosly to inflate value of his stocks. This constant lying and putting unrealistic goals (like that he will put a person on Mars by 2022 to name one of many) leads to poor working conditions. What he nicely masks as a "hc working philosophy" usually is just the maltreatment of workers which are put at a extreme overload to reach those goals. There are many articles online about this in every company he led. Like workers doing 12 hour shifts 6 days a week, workers fainting because of tiredness, ambulance arriving more than 100 times in one year in one Tesla factory. Workers in Tesla having 30% more injuries than all other car companies in the US combined, poor safety regulations and not providing proper education on safety, workers also not wanting to report their injuries because hourly wage for a injured person would drop from $22 to $10. Not letting the workers unionize (for obvious reasons), violating numerous others labour laws like not allowing workers discuss wages or working conditions,.... basically he exploits his workforce to the maximum (for personal gain) and the articles about former workers of Musk is infinite, as is the number of workers which don't work for him anymore (also for the obvious reasons). Unrealistic goals for putting people on Mars is creating very similar problems now at SpaceX. The other thing I dislike about him is his "God complex", he will save humanity, or his inventions will. He invests a lot into self-propaganda. He presents himself like a genious inventing new things 24/7, like he is the mastermind behind all the products his companies make, when some podcasts and media start spouting obvious Musk propaganda, presenting him like a new Tesla, it makes me wanna throw up. If anything he is more like Edison, taking credit for everything, but inventing almost nothing himself. You can find online the testimonies of people with whom he led first the paypal (there they kicked him out of board) or Tesla when he first invested into company and was one of three ceo's, the other two guys who actually founded Tesla and made first prototype got cheated by Musk badly. This, along with your comment, would be mine left wing critique of Elon Musk in short, which I know, no matter on how many pages I tried to elaborate it, will be dismissed many times as just a simple jealousy of his billions (some people can't fathom that not everyone sees in ultimate life happiness in billions/amount of money)

[@marczakian3511]

Musk has many faults, but the Tesla Model Y is the best selling car in the world. And Space X has contacts with NASA.

[@dragoonsunite]

@@geraldbutler5484 Solar City saw a slight growth in its last year before it went defunct after being acquired by TESLA and transitioned to TESLA Energy to obscure its financials in the TESLA stock. Prior to that year it was operating at a loss every year, and was still in debt oweing over 300 million in uncovered assets and obligations at the time of its transition. TESLA broadly speaking has stopped growing, and is currently stagnant in the market. Most telling is the fact that Elon Musk is trying to sell stock off every chance he gets, to the point that he was literally ordered to stop selling by courts, something which rarely happens to billionaires, and is in stark contrast to his bullshit claim that he'd be the first in and the last out of his own company, a promise he hasn't kept, and one that he started going back on long before his Twitter acquisition, kind of proving the point that even he thinks the stock is overvalued. His richest man in the world status is mostly on the valuation of this one overpriced stock, so I don't buy it. While clean cities would be great, TESLA itself isn't going to be the primary reason it happens. Other solar companies without as questionable leadership are leading the race in solar panel adoption. Furthermore, there is more then enough competition across the entire market for electric cars with smart cruise control features now (Which is all the TESLA autopilot really is except the features which are deemed too dangerous to actually be allowed such as city driving and off highway navigation).

[@Lookasm98]

it hurts to listen to those guys

[@williamwillaims]

Alex has always had great analogies

[@richardlee3679]

I feel like I watched an entirely different video than everyone else. The entire comment section is talking about how Alex dunked on Konstantin or whatever or as if this was some great confrontation... It was a conversation. They talked, and didn't agree on everything. How terminally online do you have to be to see a conversation as tame as this one as a confrontation to be 'won'...?

[@k_Why]

its kind of sad that you couldnt reply with the numerous criticisms of elon musk, but i guess its just not part of your subject matter and its also honestly none of your fault that the conversations steered to him that guy is quite the character though "well they cant levy any legitimate criticisms" "well there's this" "no this is something i criticize him for as well, name something else"

[@carnanreagh]

I think that Alex sometimes intentionally avoids making some rather obvious points because he doesn't want to been seen as being left. I find it hard to believe that he couldn't come up with at least one criticism of Musk.

[@k_Why]

@@carnanreagh i am not gonna lie i think that would be the absolute last thing he'd be concerned about. he openly talked about cannabis with this joke of a man who stormed off, he repeatedly argued piers morgan on the monarchy on television, he is an animal rights advocate and he is against the overbearing influence of religion. it'd be pretty difficult to hide being left at that point imo its far more likely he's just one of the millions of people who have never really concerned themselves with elon musk at all