Rose Wrist Had Some Questions

🔴 Website - www.vaush.gg/
💵 Patreon - / vaush
🌟 Other Socials 🌟
⭐️ Main Channel - / @vaush
🐦 Twitter - / vaushv
👾 Twitch - / vaushvidya
📸 Instagram - / vaushv
🔵 Facebook - / vaushvidya
🎵 TikTok - / vaushvidya
🎙Podcast - anchor.fm/vaush
#Vaush #VaushPit

[@freedomofmusic2112]

"What do you think we should do if fascists overthrow democracy?" Rose Wrist: "We should vote them out" *facepalm*

[@ticker0157]

Thier going to be the death of all of us

[@normandy2501]

Did democracy fail though if they were voted in to begin with? It honestly just sounds like either side wants authoritarianism when they don't actually win through a vote. If the Republicans win the next go around, that would mean that people like Vaush just didn't do enough convincing to move voters to at least left of center no? How would a fascist completely overthrow the democracy of the next election cycles (not just the primary)? I'm genuinely asking this not in bad faith though, so don't bother e-thuggin and whatnot with ad homs.

[@ticker0157]

@@normandy2501 it's not democratic to vote out democracy. You can't be tolerant of the intolerant.

[@simonk4174]

Timestamp?

[@highlightrelz897]

Yeah I mean we probably should aim to vote them out instead of perpetuating violence

[@HandOfVecna1188]

Alternate Title: Vaush (with no notice) takes a break from research to give a class on navigating a rhetorical minefield.

[@thesaltybeard1793]

Minefield plus mortar shelling.

[@noventia8125]

The research hadn't even started lmao

[@thecjbrowne]

It's gotta be tricky having beliefs that break TOS

[@JacatackLP]

@@thecjbrowne true just ask DesTiny

[@scslre]

@@thecjbrowne we've all got 'em!

[@colesanlo3127]

I can say with confidence that destiny lost this debate.

[@bigbluburry7450]

ong bro

[@vincenzonapoles4371]

Proxy war destiny debate?

[@monolith_g]

I can say with coincidence that you are wronght

[@oongangaquanka]

god why did they have to take our dislike button 🚷

[@plumbo5780]

I will always laugh at this joke, it gets me every time

[@ibringit987]

This is only 10 months old, and I very much remember people telling Vaush that he was overreacting, and since this convo and this entire arc of libs telling him he was overreacting, the republican party has only gotten increasingly more psychotic.

[@eyangamedud3293]

Yep vaush was right and strangely a lot of liberals at the time were too outside of dgg

[@mckenzie.latham91]

Project 2025 is literally the end of democracy and a plan for the open extermination of LGBTQ out of public life in the US so yeah Vaush was 100% right

[@MagusMirificus]

I liked President Sunday in chat: "That's not a moral system, that's the rules of Uno."

[@user-vu8es8mz8r]

Missed it! Can you tell when approximately?

[@du42bz]

@@user-vu8es8mz8r 42:25

[@amellirizarry9503]

President Sunday is based

[@ZHike360]

I love that dude so much

[@admiralpaco507]

@@user-vu8es8mz8r Time stamp is about 1:11:15

[@BLooDCoMPleX]

Rosewrist was wearing a wire in this debate.

[@eliasE989]

Rose: "yeah ok I understand" Also Rose: continues to push the same question / misunderstood narrative for the 10th time

[@ruefullysage]

@Jacque what question wasn't answered ?

[@bluhmer1990]

@Jacque You're insufferable.

[@blehblah9233]

This reminded me of a questionnaire I took in middle school. Every other question was rewritten to ask if I had smoked cigarettes, only this time it's "What would make you take up arms against the government?" over and over again.

[@depressedfengmain197]

Wait they really did this at school? Haha we used to have ones about what drugs you had tried and I was honest but they never told anybody?

[@daturave]

Ban cigarettes and i will topple the government!

[@darkmantlestudios]

@@depressedfengmain197 That's because it's for statistics not to report to your parents.

[@artisticcannibalism1350]

Looking back on all of this, it's amazing just how many people had a problem with Vaush correctly identifying what was happening in front of everyone.

[@rajrigby8385]

NGL, "Agent of Destiny" is an awesome band name.

[@babzm.1666]

God, you’re *so* right

[@IMatchoNation]

Rose very obviously came into this convo believing that Vaush secretly thinks it would be good for people to gun down Republican figureheads, but doesn't say so due to ToS limitations and instead dogwhistles it. Unfortunately for Rose, that's not what Vaush believes, but Rose kept fishing and fishing anyway only to come up empty-handed with nothing to offer up for DGG's approval. Better luck next time, fed boy.

[@kye4216]

He doesn’t secretly think that he outright said it

[@butter3754]

@@kye4216 i know lmao, vaush literally said it.

[@thecondescendinggoomba5552]

@@kye4216 good

[@mckenzie.latham91]

He was literally being fed questions by Destiny The moment Vaush realizes this, he immediately begins attacking and mocking Destiny’s rhetoric and past behaviours knowing it was going to piss off Destiny whose watching on his stream and feeding questions to Rose wrist. and we See Rose get more desperate over time to push a narrative and get Vaush to commit to an answer that Destiny clearly wanted.

[@Berserk1Manga]

"It's not that your misinterpreting anything I'm saying. It's that you sound like a federal agent." 🤣😂 I'm dead.

[@PHDinADHD]

Marie Antoinette: "Let them eat cake!" Rose Wrist: "My sister in Christ I will eat my cake"

[@JasminUwU]

But who will eat my cake?🥺

[@leosklein2573]

@@JasminUwU what if we ate cake by the guillotine? ☺️

[@esbenm6544]

She never actually said that though. It's from an anti-royalist propaganda leaflet. While certainly more based than being pro-monarchy, she was hung out to dry.

[@angelicreinforcement3373]

They would've killed her without the slogan :)

[@seto749]

@@esbenm6544 Mary MacGregor: Why don't they send their clothes to the laundry? was the question she (MM) really asked instead of why the poor didn't eat cake if bread cost too much.

[@mmmhorsesteaks]

"I only punish those who have already done harm. I am real justice!" - Vaunshu

[@du42bz]

What? That is what the libs are saying, not Vaush.

[@God_gundam36]

God damn annime line

[@craigstephenson7676]

@@God_gundam36 Moon Knight

[@lionheartz1337]

ah yes Vaush pulling the classic One Piece Marines argument.

[@luisaleloki]

Bad joke, have like

[@MechanicWolf85]

Vaush: you should defend yourself and be ready for when times get bad Everyone else: I can't believe you are advocating for violance man I thought you were better than this

[@CyborgNation83]

He is advocating for preemptive self-defense. In other words, political violence before there is legislation against you, in order to preserve a political status, or terrorism.

[@wolfxda94]

@@CyborgNation83 case in point

[@jizburg]

@@CyborgNation83 no, self defence against roaming gangs of right wing militias is not preemtive violence.

[@wolfxda94]

@@johnlonne7062 I assume you have the timestamp of that quote.

[@sleepyparadise8846]

@Xavier Time stamp right here 1:16:26

[@lunaMKultra]

It’s always fun watching someone willing to gamble with your right to exist as a human being 🏳️‍⚧️

[@Crowliflower88]

Why is this world this way? I just want to be happy and enjoy my life

[@patkohler9695]

@@Crowliflower88 Because the future Vaush is warning of won't hurt them.

[@benjamincooper5879]

"Some of you may die... but that's a sacrifice I'm willing to make." -liberals

[@moresnqp]

@@benjamincooper5879 otherwise rightie feelings might get hurt :((( what abt the christianss

[@ManticTRIGGER]

@@patkohler9695 what do you mean? how?

[@ploxobenjamin]

Vaush's point of liberals "Not being able to find a point that it's acceptable" is literally political theory that Schmitt points out as real shit.

[@AnEntropyFan]

I'm a liberal, and because I'm a liberal (AKA my moral and ethical imperatives are human and civil rights, social equality and equality under the law - the grossest violation of which is denial of bodily autonomy and opportunities to self-actualise) I'd say that genocide is unacceptable. Furthermore, I'd say that it also gives a moral and ethical clearance, if not a mandate (as in a moral and ethical obligation), to everyone to move in and act in order to try and prevent it and deal away with the assailants by any means necessary and however they see fit, for as long as they don't do it with callous disregard of human life (not that I'd cry too many tears if a Berlin here and there is turned into rubble and a Dresden or two go through an assisted incineration). I'd say what's going on in several red states is already unambiguously a full on traditional (institutionalised, state-enacted) genocide as defined by the UN Convention on Genocide under the Article II criteria B, C, D and E and is a de facto (parainstituionally enforced) genocide A to E since the state is absolutely encouraging stochastic violence which is beyond any sensible doubt leading to physical destruction of the members of the group.

[@ploxobenjamin]

@@AnEntropyFan Cool, you should talk to vaush and show him he's wrong then. I'm just a random schmuck in the comments

[@MeMe-nm7jr]

What are you implying? That this extreme rhetoric that could literally get innocent people killed through leftist violence if it were to continue is acceptable simply because we want to be sure the nazis don't come? I wish people in this community would quit pretending that this extreme rhetoric is the same as defending minorities. It's not. Vaush has said for years that people should be armed to defend themselves and nobody cared. It's this extreme "the world is ending, genocide WILL happen to us, get your guns" kind of rhetoric that people think is inneffective or dangerous, and people keep larping like this rhetoric is what will save us and that it's excusable because you're _positive_ we are on the same path as Nazi Germany. I'm not saying "it couldn't happen here" or anything like that. I'm saying that this extreme rhetoric that it will positively happen is inneffective in stopping it tomorrow, and can have dangerous outcomes today. It's *irresponsible af* from Vaush and this community and people just keep digging in. Me being against this rhetoric today is in *no way* comparable to a person in the Nazi state excusing fascism. If anything, I'm against some of the same types of rhetoric they used being used by this community.

[@AnEntropyFan]

@@ploxobenjamin Vaush is not wrong, he's just careful and doesn't want to get banned from being able to stream and upload videos. He said it all with his (rhetorical for anyone with an even semi-functional moral compass) question of did the Jews and their allies have the right to fight the Nazi state by any means necessary. The answer is of course "yes", Jews are not special and trans people are not disposable - so, do you now get what he was saying in a very politically correct and tactically safe way?

[@AnEntropyFan]

@@MeMe-nm7jr You are a "white" middle class cissy manlet from DGG, of course that the genocide won't be happening to you. Meanwhile, it's already happening to trans people in many red states, a direct genocide through state enforcement not "merely" stochastic transphobic violence. Ask your boy why he thinks murdering random anonymous people is morally justified if they try to steal his Twinkies or burn his streaming chair.

[@brandonmiracle9810]

If you don't know enough about the historical record of Nazi persecution of Jews in Europe, you're not qualified to ask any of the questions that Rose asked in this conversation. "I'd have to look into the stages of genocide that the Nazis did to the Jews" is just an unacceptable comment from anyone positioning themselves as an informed and intellectually honest actor.

[@deadeaded]

The "would you kill someone if there were no blowback or consequences?" hypothetical is just a morally charged version of asking "if this person died in their sleep, would that be good?"

[@aurtosebaelheim5942]

I find the "no consequences" part particularly confusing. Someone being dead is a consequence of them being killed, so killing someone with no consequences would mean they weren't dead. An action that truly had no consequences would essentially be non-canon (memory of the action is a consequence of the action, etc.). "No consequences" needs so much clarification that it's virtually meaningless.

[@PiecefulKaos]

​@@aurtosebaelheim5942 He's talking about "no consequences" in the context of a political movement. Specifically, in stopping this hypothetical genocide and the genociders coming to power. Vaush was concerned that killing lawmakers would give them easy justification and ability to come to power and commit genocide, perhaps even hastening it. Rose Wrist was wondering, okay, what if we knew this was not the case, and that killing the lawmakers would not lead to these consequences or harm the anti-genocide movement. This is what he meant by "no consequences".

[@PiecefulKaos]

@Aziben M1 Abstracting from the reality of the situation seems reasonable to do given Vaush has done so as well by claiming we are on the precipice of a genocide that's imminent if Republicans take power.

[@scoutbane1651]

@@PiecefulKaos Yeah but that's fucking stupid. You're basically presupposing that it does all of the things Vaush wants and none he doesn't at that point, in which case no shit he sees it as morally good, why do you even need to ask the question? The framing seems very leading.

[@PiecefulKaos]

@@scoutbane1651 You just argued against asking hypotheticals to tease out people's moral positions. Are you also opposed to Vaush doing this literally all the time?

[@HERNDONADER]

I love these two people, but I agree with Vaush in this conversation. Watched it live and, while I sympathize with Rose’s position that institutional solutions to anti-democratic actions are more preferable than violent reaction, where left/lib people draw the line of ‘when to take extra-institutional steps to curb fascist actions’ is the source of this disagreement. The problem with this source of disagreement is the moral line being crossed is relative to how important an individual views certain aspects of our democratic institutions/human rights. Obviously, Rose Wrist values human rights and democratic institutions, however, Rose doesn’t seem to believe it’s morally justifiable to react violently when certain human rights for minorities are removed or institutions that protect democratic interests are eroded. This doesn’t mean that Vaush or people who agree with him believe that republican lawmakers should be killed, rather, advocating for said minority communities to prepare for violent interaction as a result of fascist policies is a perfectly defensible moral position that hopefully everyone would agree with, even Rose will when he finally takes a position on this.

[@Dreigonix]

Exactly. Preparation for violent conflict is good and is not the same as mass shootings and assassinations. Though quite frankly I’m a bit tired of people pepeposting advocacy for the latter (or just openly advocating for the latter.)

[@MeMe-nm7jr]

Advocating for defense is one thing and it's something vaush has done for years. That's different than this current wave of extreme, fear-mongerimg, fox news-esque rhetoric that he started with in last couple days then backed away from in this convo (without _actually_ backing away from it). Feel like us people advocating for restraint are getting drowned out by people screeching about nazi germany. Political difficulty is difficult but doesn't always require yelling about fuckn genocide.

[@cyoung7127]

I agree with this, but the issue is that Vaush's reliance on fascistic rhetoric (because he thinks it is consequentially the best way to advocate his positions) comes across at times as reactionary and unhinged and may actually hurt the Left's electoral endeavors

[@ZachRM95]

Rose Writ is literally like Anne Franks neighbor who snitched her and her family out to the Nazi's because you know the institutions will help stop the genocide after the victims get killed seems to be what i got out of it.

[@OryxAU]

Yeah, the second amendment was included for this exact purpose. Even though there's a lot of propaganda around it, at its core it was an anti authoritarian measure.

[@thatdarnskag5043]

Vowsh using the "police self-defense" line of questioning to mirror Rose's earlier questions was pretty good. I feel like Rose recognized the similarities, but unfortunately, he decided to double down on his framing.

[@jackskellingtonsora]

That's the reason why police violence doesn't work. If the police are going to shoot you, whether you're guilty of something or not, they've effectively shut down any cooperation. Cooperation doesn't matter now because they're going to kill you. So any amount of self-defense is justified because someone is trying to kill you. It doesn't matter if that someone is police or not. You can't do anything or cooperate at all ever again if you're dead. You've effectively shut down the conversation by threatening to shoot someone.

[@tinyclown799]

What do you mean double down on his framing? Vaush asked those questions as a gotcha and Rose responded easily. Vaush was the one slipping and sliding all over the place.

[@hadronoftheseus8829]

@@tinyclown799 If you believe that, you necessarily lack the intelligence to keep track of the logical connectives at play.

[@PiecefulKaos]

If Rose behaved in a similar way to how Vaush did, Rose would have responded "Well I'm not sure if using violence against a police officer trying to unjustifiably kill you is okay because I'm a consequentialist and what if by shooting at the police officer you hit an innocent person behind the police officer? So it's hard to say. Nobody has an answer. Oh, now you're asking me about what if there were no consequences of killing an innocent person? Are you fedposting right now?" *1 hour of back and forth about fedposting and liberals and blah blah blah* "yeah of course it'd be okay in that hyperspeciric hypothetical situation". Only took that long to answer 1 question! Instead, Rose said "yes". Gigachad.

[@bluhmer1990]

@@PiecefulKaos No he didn't. What the hell were you listening to?

[@sleepyparadise8846]

Vaush: I think Leftist and minorities should prepare and defend themselves considering how things are going after the failed coup Rose: What about proactively attacking the other side Vaush: ….No I just think we should be able to defend ourselves Rose: Yeah I don’t really believe you, so I’ll ask again, what do you think about proactive preemptive acts of violence? Lean into the mic I want you to be clear Vaush:….Self…defense… only

[@woolee4400]

timestamp plzzz

[@johnthomason9980]

@@woolee4400 It's a paraphrase of pretty much the entire convo

[@TheSquareheadgamer]

Not to mention. Vaush: When do you think proactive violence is needed? Rose: I couldn't possibly answer that without more research.

[@sleepyparadise8846]

Vaush keeps mentioning how republicans want minorities like LGBTQ to have a “Social death” it would be one thing if these were really just words from Republicans. but these words are turning into law and the GOP have basically made incitements of violence and calls to action to their base to basically attack the left and minorites. See Buffalo and El Passo and synagogue shootings

[@sleepyparadise8846]

1:16:15 is a Example of this Rose: Im talking about real world hypotheticals here about violence. Vaush: Im not talking about violence against law makers Im advocating for self defence Rose then continues to push the question of “Is Vaush callingfor acts of violence against law makers?”

[@janpavelka3602]

I'm actually quite a fan of Rose's work in general, he's usually very methodical in deconstructing and debating an idea. Not here sadly. Maybe he wanted a specific answer for his vid, this sort of weak "I have no opinions, so I don't have to engage, but you have opnions, so you have to defend yourself" is pretty uncharacteristic

[@chaselewis5372]

Haven't seen his stuff. My impression is he is your typical liberal who has some preconceived notions that are just incorrect about the world. He needs to see people as radical when he disagrees with them so just kept asking the same question trying to paint Vaush as wrong or radical. After failing he just runs in circles because he hadn't prepared past point 1 of the argument because he literally couldn't imagine their was rationality to defending yourself from a group of people that literally advertises on the radio and in churches for the mass murder of 'liberals' and LGBTQ already.

[@schnoz2372]

seems pretty bad faith lol

[@jascu4251]

Is that intrinsically a bad approach? Not necessarily speaking of this particular exchange, but in an overall sense I like the Socratic approach of one person asking questions and exploring the answers without necessarily countering them or putting forward own stances in return

[@mechanomics2649]

At the same time, it's weird that people are calling him bad faith and accusing him of baiting. Even more so, that people are committed to those accusations regardless of him trying to clarify.

[@Gobackto4chan]

@@mechanomics2649 It isn’t that weird. He rephrased the same leading question enough times to be noticeable by almost everybody watching. He’s either the most naive good faith person ever or there was an ulterior motive.

[@kirksheridan6669]

Rose really seemed like he wanted Vaush to look at this from being in his shoes but he seemed to almost completely NOT try to see how this played out from Vaush's perspective.

[@mckenzie.latham91]

He was literally being Fed questions by Destiny the fact that he tries to keep pushing the same question to get the answer that Destiny wanted was evidence of this and the fact that Vaush keeps hitting at Destiny knowing Destiny is behind this, is perfect.

[@LDIndustries]

Ok as soon as Rose started whining about how Vaush was "delegitimizing the conversation" I lost all preconceptions of Rose coming to this fully in good faith.

[@derekhodgson6384]

Gotta love how "a few questions" creates an hour and a half of video.

[@TheFiki14]

Rose: so what’s your position on killing republican law makers Vaush: I only advocate for self-defence. Rose: so I understand that you’re being limited by TOS and not giving your honest perspective, so I’ll frame this question differently.

[@andyrihn1]

Continued... Vaush: That last statement is strange and makes your questions sound like ban baiting Rose: *autistic whining*

[@Tacklepig]

Yeah except he didn't clearly say "I only advocate for self defense", he mucked about and talked about Destiny for some reason

[@Khalkara]

@@Tacklepig He did clearly say that, feel free to try to cite a quote of him in this video where he is being vague about it. I'll wait.

[@yoboiboy4182]

@@Khalkara there’s the fact that he keeps drawing similarities between now and nazi germany and asks “when should the Jews have preemptively struck” Implying that lgbtq ppl of today should be gearing up to take out republicans lawmakers. But then when RW asks vaush where he’s draw the line vaush says he doesn’t know, even though he’s positing the question. The moment he said his goal is to fearmonger is when you should’ve stopped taking him seriously.

[@Khalkara]

@@yoboiboy4182 You're being incoherent. Drawing true similarities doesn't imply that lgbt people today should take out republicans lawmakers. He literally acknowledged in this convo that taking out republicans wouldn't stop the lgbt oppression from republicans. You're inserting that in there. Besides that, you can ask a question of someone without knowing the answer yourself. This doesn't mean we should stop taking the person asking the question seriously. Let me know when you can cite Vaush being vague about his advocacy for self defense.

[@Dooferification]

He asked the same question 5 times with vaush pointing out why he won't/shouldn't elaborate

[@sargonsblackgrandfather2072]

Is Destiny really so obsessed with Vaush whilst pretending he isn’t that he has to send a proxy to secretly debate on his behalf?

[@iam-geoffreytheelite5275]

yes

[@theguildhall3246]

RoseWrist, more like... FedWrist, haha gottem 🥁

[@JohnDoe-xv9du]

Rosewrist was trying to use his credibility to continue this convo, but I feel like destiny watching this debate was what derailed it

[@EmmsReality]

🌹 = 💩

[@cceste6885]

I mean, vaush also hinted at Rose being bad faith before rose mentioned the one question destiny sent over. it was a whole series of miscommunications and bad faith assumptions imo

[@SA-mo3hq]

"Don't worry, the process will save us!" - Liberals being marched to the De Santis Ecofascist death camps, 2065

[@natanaru]

Pls no

[@JacatackLP]

Republicans will still be doing climate denial so you can take the eco off that fash

[@ZachRM95]

@@natanaru Its literally what RW was arguing for.

[@user-ql8ji8dj9u]

Yes yes just like the Obama fema camps. You guys are delusional. 2064

[@JacatackLP]

@@user-ql8ji8dj9u did Obama support a coup attempt or form a state guard after cracking down on civil rights protesters and suppressing Covid data by swatting scientists? Because De Santis did all those things

[@bassyboi581]

The problem with this way of "not preparing for the worst case scenario" with the road that things are heading to is that it ends up as the political equivalent of the Freeze response to fascism. Trying to wait for the right moment to get ready means not acting when things are escalating and in the last stages ending up in a learned helplessness because at those points there's not much you can do without outing yourself and going straight into the camps. So you lay low and move out of the way as you wait until you get found out too Edit: also getting prepared isn't just buying and using arms regularly, but creating networks to get ppl to safe places, resources and info. The point is to become the least appealing target to right wing militias through a connected community, which also can seem to retaliate. Pretty sure vaush has already differenciated that from "preemptive strike"

[@ZachRM95]

Yeah I don't know why liberals get a disgusted reaction when it comes to bearing arms in case of government aggression against its people. It's literally in the constitution and one of the reasons why sadly we have a second amendment. Like no one is forcing you to join a leftist militia but advocating for self-reliance/defense isn't a bad idea regardless of the political landscape.

[@LikeGod_ButBetterLooking]

Hard disagree. Arming yourselves in preparation for this just speeds up the facsist take over and exacerbates the state violence. When Vaush says buy guns, he's saying he wants you dead.

[@MeMe-nm7jr]

Nobody is arguing that we shouldn't prepare for the worst case. Cmon. That's seriously ridiculous. People are saying the rhetoric is the problem. He's not just telling people to prepare. He's yelling about genocide and extreme BS as-if the US is requiring all lgbtq people to register with papers or something.

[@LikeGod_ButBetterLooking]

@@Nihil847 except Vaush's preparation here would be like someone saying climate change is coming so they adbocate everyone get the biggest engine car they possibly can and burn as much fossil fuel as possible now to prevent the corporations from using that fuel to ruin the climate...

[@bassyboi581]

@@MeMe-nm7jr Trump banned trans ppl from the army, and it was when trans existence wasn't redemonized explicitly as grooming and trying to pass anti trans laws to gain votes. CRT was in the tail end of the era and it still did harm because of the inertia in the Republican candidates. If the Republicans do get in power again, they're now going to push further because they realized how good "Unhinged" does in their base. Pretty sure they'd give Patriot Prayer types carte blanche to go harass and use marginalized communities as their private hunting grounds

[@kevley26]

Wow editors are working overtime!

[@diggymgee]

Tempest is gonna need to form a union soon

[@Bealeafed]

@@diggymgee dont need to when you get paid like they do.

[@JacatackLP]

They knew Destiny was gonna try and beat Vaush to the upload

[@ELDENLORD89]

Tempest and August are going ham. Bought to watch DesTinys review of this. I hope these genocide drama keeps the videos going LMAO

[@Ghostigul]

This aged really well

[@stevenbeshel7369]

The fact that rose called up destiny right after this is super sussy.

[@mitlanderson]

He really did? On stream? Lol

[@stevenartiss8537]

Vaush is braindead

[@AvantaGarden]

Sus, how?

[@kevinjohnanand]

Oh my god you guys are literally insufferable

[@Bellitchi]

@@kevinjohnanand VDS

[@TheSquareheadgamer]

It's pretty fucking telling Rise Wrist wasn't just honest that Destiny asked that on question until Vuash started to pry into it.....

[@donjuan2371]

Yup, super weird behavior.

[@CrushedFemur]

Wait... did Destiny ask two questions? Cause Rose said the one question towards the beginning was from Destiny

[@TheSquareheadgamer]

@@CrushedFemur rose only said it was from Destiny after asking the question. He did to be fair said he was fed it before asking though.

[@Blanksmithy123]

Maybe because he knew vaush would bitch about it, and he kinda did...

[@CrushedFemur]

@@TheSquareheadgamer wow just relistened, don't know how I missed it was the same question

[@documentthedrama8279]

I think rose wrist should probably think about his logical system when his entire point was fed posting and defending destiny gambling 25k on trans genocide

[@jack3226]

Is it just me or did Rose have a Tell Tale Heart moment in the beginning at 8:07? Because Vaush basically responds to his question with "-its hard to discuss this topic in detail due to TOS and that people i talked to previously know the answers in response to the Nazis but are uncomfortable applying that to the GOP so instead, ill speak broadly and generally-" which Im p sure is just saying the TOPIC is hard to discuss with TOS and that people he talked to before got uncomfortable applying action against nazi officials to modern day GOP, hence his general response of "assassination of lawmakers is generally bad and should be discouraged cause it causes bad outcomes and enables irresponsible ways of thinking". But Rose responds by asking if it feels like hes TOS baiting Vaush, which leads me to believe he felt called out from hearing a few key words but not actually listening to the point Vaush made which wasn't a call out. Nowhere in Vaush's answer did he say he felt baited or that the line of questioning was sus, he just said the Topic itself is difficult to discuss. I like Rose but re-watching this moment (and the bit where he asks Destiny's question, claims its his own after being called out but that the next is Destinys, then proceeds to ask the same question changing "would you-" to "would trans people-") only makes me feel less charitable to him in this discussion than i did live.

[@jack3226]

Quite frankly, the discussion would have probs been fine if Rose never even tried the Destiny question. I feel Rose got every answer he was looking for up till then.

[@bernardfacebook7821]

@@jack3226 True, Vaush has a very public dislike for Destiny so it seemed kinda tone-deaf of Rose Wrist to ask a question directly from him. Bad vibes tbh.

[@darestone3335]

@@jack3226 Honestly, i don't think Vaush had many good substantive answers to speak of. He mostly just outsourced answering difficult questions to his amorphous, useless "utilitarianism", which basically serves the function of a thought terminating cliche. Rose wrist: so is violence justified in this specific case would you say? Vaush: let me consult my normative ethical theory..... Alright i have formulated my response..... if it has positive utility, then it is positive. If it has negative utility, then it is bad. This was also contrasted in such a hilarious way when, after Vaush started getting heated answering questions, asked rose his own question. But then Rose just answered it straightforwardly and Vaush lost his cool after realizing the self own he just brought on himself. That shit was so funny!

[@EE-jp5ev]

@@darestone3335 I feel like we watched 2 completely different videos. Rose just asked a very straight putt question 30 times and Vaush gave a detailed answer to it every time, then got annoyed rose was outsourcing questions from someone Vaush dislikes.

[@darestone3335]

@@EE-jp5ev How do you square that then with accusations of bad faith, fed posting and being a general asshole to Rose who was actually unbelievably charitable and forthcoming about his preparation and intentions. I think Vaush started acting like a buffoon because 1. He had trouble actually answering much of anything related definitive statements on political violence and 2. because Destiny was watching But the thing is, Rose wasn't responsible for either of those things! The only Destiny related meme was one question Destiny asked Rose to ask Vaush. Rose openly stated before asking "hey, just so you know, this is a fed question". But by the end Vaush was just losing it accusing rose of being an agent of DGG and shit. It was so fucking cringe ngl

[@renzowise8261]

It feels weird seeing people like Rose who are clearly intelligent just disengage with the political reality of violence as a tool to defend democracy and human rights. The only reason I can imagine is that people like Rose believe they have the time and necessary political will to not just prefer but only consider institutional solutions to these problems that would be well outside of institutional influence.

[@iam-geoffreytheelite5275]

I commented before but it's insane how wrong rose wrist and destiny were about vaush's rhetoric on what direction republicans were heading and now fucking look at the state of the country...

[@amandabrian6975]

"Steal a little and they throw you in jail / Steal a lot and they make you king"

[@TheBasedGreeg]

That was extremely quick, and this was such a weird interaction. I think Rose Wrist is usually pretty cool, but this was just extremely disappointing…

[@kevinjohnanand]

Why? Because he actually pinned Vaush down on his unhinged behavior?

[@XIII_Vanitas]

@@kevinjohnanand lmao

[@ihavenoname4139]

@@kevinjohnanand i lmao'd at that

[@kevinjohnanand]

@@ihavenoname4139 Vaushites are just as sychophantic as DGGers lmfao. Defending streamer daddy with every fiber of their being.

[@God_gundam36]

@@kevinjohnanand that we should defend ourselves against the party who says they're going to kill you?

[@emexdizzy]

1:05:05 "You didn't offend ME as a person, actually, you offended the metaphysical concept of this conversation!"

[@jin-zz1bj]

I like Rose and really dislike Vaush but Vaush is completely correct here. And Destiny is a clown for pretending that LGBT aren’t under real threat.

[@johnhenson6495]

they are not under the real threat of a genocide

[@jin-zz1bj]

@@johnhenson6495 By the UN definition yes we are.

[@schmittywerbenjagermanjens2649]

“Under real threat” and “on the precipice of genocide” are VERY different claims my dude

[@jin-zz1bj]

@@schmittywerbenjagermanjens2649 So do you believe being on the precipice of genocide isn’t threatening?

[@johnhenson6495]

@@jin-zz1bj you arent, sorry man

[@jaysteelsun]

Anytime Destiny gets brought up all the DGGers flood Vaushes comments and boost his videos in the algorithm.

[@hi__im_zack4890]

I think the argument that genocide being an issue on the horizon necessarily implies that we need to Roblox people in power presupposes the great man theory of history (that actions of important individuals can describe history), which is not something i would have expected from Rose Wrist. I agree with Vaush in that Rose Wrist is overly simplifying the arguments around something way more complicated and nuanced. It's hard to come away from this convo not thinking that Rose Wrist was TOS baiting (intentionally or unintentionally). I'm a little disappointed in him ngl.

[@amerashi1111]

step 1. roblox every supreme court conservative step 2. biden appoints new ones step 3. socialist society

[@sammyismuff]

Rose Wrist seemed to present it as if there couldn’t be negative consequences to political violence. There obviously would be, and utilitarians understand this. The question is, would the costs outweigh the benefits; or more accurately, which decision leads to the best outcome. Asking a utilitarian if they think killing lawmakers would be good is pointless. You already know what they think: it would be good if it was net positive. But we don’t know all the variables, so we can’t make a fully informed decision. It’s weird that he didn’t really seem to get that.

[@hoodedferret]

And yet every military targets leaders at the start of any conflict in order to disrupt the chains of command and demoralize enemies. It's not as nuanced as you or Rose think it is.

[@user-sm1bi5ix6l]

@@amerashi1111 unironically had thoughts about this. If only someone would do the thing already...

[@pi172]

Just started to watch the actual conversation. But this is already a pretty interesting thought that you have here. There are very few incidents in which robloxing people in power is an effective strategy to fight fascism. In most cases I totally agree with you, its usually not about "great men" but about structures, ideas, movements, milieus. You roblox one and they have a martyr and a new one will easily replace him and you not only havent changed anything for the better but actually made it worse. On the other hand certain fascist power structures are in their very nature very reliant on one single or very few persons and have a rather chaotic unregulated system with a high importance on personal relationships. Hitler e.g. was such a strong uncontested "Führer"-figure with great charisma. So what would have happened if you would have robloxed Hitler? Some spontaneous raw thoughts: Roblox in 1920s: nothing big would have changed. There was still a lot going on internally in the NSDAP. Soon they wouldve found a new Führer with the same rhetorical skills and pragmatic strife for power in alliance with the conservatives Roblox in 1932: A huge portion of the electorial wins for the NSDAP could be attributed to Hitlers appeal. Robloxing him would have led to election losses in short term due to some chaos within the NSDAP before they would have settled on a new Führer and established him in public eye. The interesting question is how long this phase of the chaotic power vacuum and weakened NSDAP would have lasted. Some months? Then nothing major wouldve changed. But some years? Very likely that they wouldve missed the historic window of opportunity for a power grab. Germany would have started to recover from the economic crisis without people attributing it to the NSDAP and peoples frustration with democracy would have slowly declined. A "new" Hitler wouldnt have been able to start such a radical dictatorship in 1936 like the real one which started 1933. Roblox in 1940/41: Hitlers popularity reached its peak. He would have become a glorious martyr for many and a successor wouldnt have had a problem to continue the dictatorship. Maybe even a more wise fascist, who wouldnt have attacked the soviet union, but for sure it stil wouldve been a brutal dictatorship with genocides. Roblox in 194/45: Would have been for sure a good thing. the war was lost for every person living in reality to see. The majority of germans was no longer supporting the war. A new Führer wouldve been weaker and very likely germany would have surrendered earlier which wouldve spared millions of lifes.

[@mckenzie.latham91]

I love as soon As Vaush realized this guy was being fed questions by Destiny he immediately began attacking and mocking Destiny’s rhetoric and past behaviours knowing it was going to piss off Destiny whose watching on his stream and feeding questions to Rose wrist.

[@LDIndustries]

Something I'd say to respond to Araxiel in chat who said "Vaush doesn't know when he'd say that we should fight back with violence" is: Vaush explicitly said that we should only specifically engage in violence as a self defense measure against militias and attempts at targeted violence. The difference here is that Vaush has said he knows when he'd advocate for violence IN PAST CASES and in hypotheticals like with climate change meanwhile Rose is refusing to answer those questions for a long time until fully fully pressed on it with the bringing up of receipts from DMs.

[@justass3001]

This was somehow the most stunlocked conversation I've ever seen on Vaush's channel

[@KaliahSheDevil]

you must have missed the professor flowers debate, it's 3 hours of going in circles lol

[@TMmodify]

@@KaliahSheDevil the last TJump convo is also s-tier stunlocked bs

[@rencion2885]

This was live today lmao excellent editing

[@LotharOfTheHillPeople]

I love that RW would ask about LGBT genocide without looking into whether they believe it’s happening or not. That definitely made me feel like this was TOS-baiting and in bad faith.

[@ICHderKelte]

Why? Can you not ask a person to clarify his stated opinion, without yourself having yet not fully formed your position on the same topic?

[@bernardfacebook7821]

@@ICHderKelte Is it so unreasonable to want a person to be knowledgeable on a question they ask? How are you supposed to meaningfully interact with an answer if you don't even know about what you're asking? "Hey man what's your opinion about the Uyghur genocide? Oh you think it's bad well I don't really have an opinion I haven't looked into it yet." It's not like he's asking Vaush for information, unless Rose just supplements other people's opinions for his own.

[@ICHderKelte]

@@bernardfacebook7821 First, having not a fully formed opinion does not mean, that you are not knowlegeable on a topic. Second, even If you are not fully informed on a topic, or are not enough informed to a level where you can say, that you can build confidently youre opinion on this topic, I still see no problem with asking another person about their stance on a topic. Do you think you should be only allowed to ask people about topics, where you yourself have already build an opinion? Third, giving his own opinion, or a clarification of youre opinion, should not need another persons opinion, it was not a debate in this sense.

[@LotharOfTheHillPeople]

@@ICHderKelte generally you'd wait to get into a conversation in front of thousands of people until you have even Googled the topic. But hey, maybe you enjoy just spouting off with no knowledge.

[@ICHderKelte]

@@LotharOfTheHillPeople do you think, this applies in this case? Like I wrote, you can be knowledgeable on a topic and still have not an fully informed opinion. Do you think, Rose in this case, has not even the knowledge of a first google search? I would doubt that. When you ask someone for a clarification of his stated opinion, how do you "spout" with no knowlegde? It is quite the opposite, you ask to get more knowlegde and clarification. I think you also haven't thought this really through, but you have obviously a strong opinion on this, maybe this is also mit good?

[@ombra711]

This was insufferable. I like Rose Wrist but this seemed like ban baiting 100%

[@ryanmccabe1036]

I disagree, Rose is fucking insufferable.

[@Tacklepig]

Honestly, no. It feels like Vaush is just tiptoeing around actually answering here. Idk Rose Wrist or what their deal is, but they're asking legitimate questions, and Vaush is basically dogwhistleing around giving an actual answer. If his position on this is so bad he could get banned for it, he should actually get banned for it. Fuck this shit.

[@TheCaptainblaubeere]

@@Tacklepig liberal

[@OblongBurrbank]

@@Tacklepig nah. Felt like RW was asking loaded questions. RW: when did you stop being a domestic terrorist? V: I don't think I've ever been a domestic terrorist. You: stop tip toeing around the questions!

[@OblongBurrbank]

@Aziben M1 lmao

[@Tom-vx7xm]

"I wrote down the questions 3 min before the debate. But I did have time to talk with Destiny to get his question on what to ask"

[@chaselewis5372]

Hilarious 'not a premeditated attack', proceeds to ask the same questions 15 times each because he doesn't like the answer trying to get the one he wants.

[@Keviamaya]

He wants a straight answer. Vaush was running away from answering it, Rose answer his own question. The reason why Vaush can't answer this is cause a reasonable line would be "if they intent to genocide people is okay to use violence" but he is saying that the GOP is going to genocide people so he would be asking for violence. This is what RW was getting at.

[@carefreetraveler2280]

Maybe if Vaush actually answered the question. He seems to avoid taking any solid position and then goes on to poison the well just in case he may say some stupid shit. He can just say the whole thing was “bad faith” and dismiss everything. Answer the fucking questions and stop asking why or who or what.

[@zacheryeckard3051]

@@carefreetraveler2280 He did. He advocates only for self defense. Was that not clear?

[@NoFace-Killah]

YES

[@kitsunin4690]

@@carefreetraveler2280 Nah, I just think Vaush's actual beliefs feel like the kind of thing someone could say because their true beliefs are either reprehensible or bannable. So if he's just being honest (which he is) one can feel that they need to probe further because he's just trying not to get TOS'd. But he's being honest. Vaush has a habit of honestly believing things that make people think "HUH, that's not a bad thing to believe, but most people wouldn't say that, so you MUST also believe XYZ things that are bad."

[@jonno9238]

Rose: I'm not interested in litigating this dispute between the two of you. SELF REPORT Yes. You. Absolutely. Are. ...Desperately.

[@jakeklutts864]

1 second in. Vaush says hello and Rose immediately asks him “how do you define a genocide?” Lol

[@robynreanimates3503]

God I knew Rose Wrist was a liberal but i didn't know he was *this* much of a liberal

[@tobywood9156]

seeing this debate topic in hindsight, man i hate that vaush is always right, can he please just be wrong about war and genocide for once?

[@justvisiting375]

Destiny got turned into a Buick in this debate

[@Molecular-Brainwaves-Translate]

This is unrelated but i like how Destiny's chat is painting vaush like a Al Shabbab militant because of his support for guns (even though Vaush is open to some kinds of gun reform). This could work for us.

[@benjamincooper5879]

"I don't have an opinion on this, I'm just here to ask questions. So anyway, tell me more about why you want your audience to go out right now and start Robloxing republican lawmakers?"

[@Tacklepig]

yeah but Vaush is actually giving off the vibe that that's what he's saying though

[@hgbguy]

@@Tacklepig for one no but secondly if we we're going towards nazi occupation would you want to just trust the process to stop them or have a plan b backup incase militias try storm your community. the point is defence and deterrent not going out and doing violent stuff. if the idea of defending yourself is too much well give me all your stuff then. because at that point you're already dead when the police go from ''protect and serve'' to remove undesirable leftists and minorities. those resources are better spent on somebody actually looking to survive fascism. if you don't think its happening sorry you're fucking blind.

[@yoboiboy4182]

That’s the implication that people are picking up dude. He’s telling them a genocide is coming and continuously draws parallels between now and nazi germany. He kept asking rose “at what point should Jews have killed the nazi leaders”. Vaush has already stated that he wants to fear monger in a similar fashion to tucker Carlson. He’s obviously trying to nudge ppl a certain way.

[@hgbguy]

@@yoboiboy4182 read history about pre nazi germany look at america today please try and tell me theres no similarities to the build up and rise of the nazi party with what the conservatives are doing. all going well they fail but its actually irresponsible at this point to be in denial of the possibility and the points vaush makes are defensive. but yeah yknow what if things keep going the direction they're going with republicans its not fantastical to say hey maybe fighting nazis isn't a bad thing. we are not there yet but being prepared isn't something to sneer at as an ignorant privileged liberal in denial who never actually has to deal with the consequences of the rise of fascism first. by the time it touches you it'll be too late so please educate yourself.

[@Bobogdan258]

@@Tacklepig vibes based politics virgin

[@psychologicalsuccess3476]

Okay yep this was major fed posting, they kept changing the question just enough to tease out any call to violence they could

[@anebiz]

I think even as a public figure you should be allowed to set boundaries for yourself. Vaush has made it clear time and time again that he does not want to interact with Destiny. Rosewrist approaching Vaush with any questions from Destiny was extremely bad faith.

[@catboynestormakhno2694]

Exactly else you can justify far right nutjobs harrasing people to get answers for their stupid questions, it's almost like harrasment isn't cool in general

[@arseniykorchevskiy1564]

We never know when someone is actually bad faith, but rose wrist passes the bar for me here, if you are good faith you should actively try to give your opponent charity but it felt like rose wrist was trying to catch vaush saying something that sounds bad in a clip while avoiding answering what his position is. If you’re gonna have a conversation on something, maybe you should make up your own mind about it first? Unless he was actually just acting as a stand in for Destiny

[@hobbabobba7912]

What vaush is saying is bad! He believes the republicans are laying the ground work for a genocide. This is insane.

[@Skelethin]

Rose literally came into this discussion with the intention of getting proper idea of Vaush's option so he could use it as a reference for building his own opinion when he looked into it deeper. He didn't have an opinion yet not because he didn't care, but because he hasn't had enough information to feel confident in having one to begin with.

[@arseniykorchevskiy1564]

@@Skelethin Like I said, it’s impossible to know you’re right, but if i were doing that, I would have approached the convo more charitably and would do my best to make sure my opponent isn’t feeling like they are being baited into clips, which he didn’t do.

[@Skelethin]

@@arseniykorchevskiy1564 Rose was very sloppy with how he approached this for sure. He should have taken like 10 minutes to focus and narrow down the questions he had before even messaging Vaush, to make sure he had an idea of how volatile the questions could be and phrase them better. He didn't, then Vaush got paranoid, and then they both doubled down. Rose was justified in questioning Vaush's stance, it got side tracked into uselessness nearly right away.

[@SpanishMoonRock]

This Rose person is insufferable. Started a very fishy conversation and then acted super whiny and aggrieved. Probably the most insecure person I have ever heard.

[@in7446]

I find it pretty ironic that you would call someone insecure when Vowsh is literally fearmongering genocide and the rest of his audience is believing it.

[@sXePunkV2]

@@in7446 this comment aged like milk

[@coladict]

New rule: Rose Wrist has no ground to accuse Demon Mama of debating in bad faith.

[@jack3226]

i dont even like DM anymore and i agree with this

[@CaBdosdos]

Srsly wtf is with this guy lol

[@galedribble9535]

This was interesting. I won’t say Rose is bad faith…but I completely understand and respect Vaush’s suspicion His repeated questions of what Vaush already answered and the confluence of circumstances leading to the call and Destiny watching and providing a question definitely looked odd

[@Tyler-oc6ce]

What about vaush turning the debate against destiny and "liberals" half the time? He even said anyone that doesn't agree with him must be intentionally misunderstanding his point which is exactly how bad faith actors debate.

[@sypherthe297th2]

Well to be fair and considering how obsessed Destiny is, Vaush could give an interview in an electromagnetic dead zone on Pluto and Destiny would desperately try to interject himself.

[@schnoz2372]

Idk seemed bad faith from the start to the end lol

[@firstwavenegativity6379]

Is answering a question from Destiny that scary?

[@galedribble9535]

@@firstwavenegativity6379 your comment is a convenient oversimplification of the situation which completely overlooks all of the other factors that went along with the question from Destiny

[@C0urne]

Weird and uncharacteristic loaded questions by Rose.

[@zacheryeckard3051]

>Wouldn't call Jan6th a coup Seriously, Rose?

[@brutuslugo3969]

You’d have to completely change the definition of coup to make Jan 6 fit

[@arabiannights5301]

@@brutuslugo3969 Yeah, maybe by adding 'attempted' before it. Otherwise, no. It was a violent attempt to undo the process of a democratic election so as to plant into power illegally the previous president. That's a coup. It may not have worked, it may not have been brilliantly planned, it may not have involved the military, but it was a coup.

[@excalibur2772]

@@brutuslugo3969 attempted coup. there. not much of a moral change

[@JacatackLP]

@@brutuslugo3969 “a sudden, violent, and illegal seizure of power from a government.” That is ver batem what they attempted on Jan 6th

[@sepulcher8263]

Insurrection.

[@elysahatestostudy9364]

The voice everyone was hearing was Destiny's spirit live reaction to their discussion

[@bolshevikY2K]

momento liberal entrante

[@playerkit]

Well, that was a huge waste of time. Understanding Vaush's prescriptions of when violence, especially self-defense against political violence, might be warranted does not take 90 minutes and repeating nearly identical questions 5 times to get a specific answer. But ofc I'm not a liberal, so I guess that tracks. I've watched one Rose Wrist video before, it was okay. Probably won't watch another after this. They're either incredibly dense despite their strong linguistics, or intentionally malicious. Regardless, the result is the same: ban and/or clip baiting. Pathetic.

[@Bobogdan258]

President Sunday left some scathing remarks on promoting the aesthetics of rationality over actually trying to understand the people you're talking to. The only critique I could give PS is that he was the exact other way around with PF.

[@bigboy2217]

Echo chamber take won’t lie. Rose spent most this convo building on the questions because the answers being given weren’t clear, and because a lot of time was spent rhetorically pinning Rose to destiny despite a serious lack of evidence (nor fault if that were the case). Vaush generates rhetorical capital by making a bunch of boogeymen to loosely stick his political opposition on in case of emergencies where his positions are pressed. He did it with right wingers and he does it with liberals more and more now. Of course all his open positions on how to run his community support this, because it’s better for him if everyone thinks bubbling yourself and morally grandstanding every other political lane is virtuous. Nothing rose said or did in this convo was remotely bad faith, it was just difficult to nail down vaush’s positions with precision because so much effort was spent dealing with rhetorical attacks from a loser who spends all his time making his rhetorical attacks better for his brain dead audience. Cope.

[@hgbguy]

it was really weird watching this live how rose came is said it was just a few questions then he'll be off and he just kept pressing it became really clear that this wasn't just clarification but leading questions and the moment he got fed a question by destiny he should've been forthright said that happened and just left out of respect. the way he kept trying to weasel out of clear conversation enders to this stupid bait shows the bad faith coming here not with the intention of clarification but clips magnified by the destiny orbit rose and others like him engage in. anyone in good faith should've gotten the point a lot quicker if he didn't want to clip he could've DM'd but he had to make it a call while on stream. even if it wasn't his intention at the beginning the fact he had no problem with the way it was going and didn't just dip and come back later and not interrupt the research stream for hours on end. i find it really hard to see this as anything but bad faith. seriously though theres so many better ways to go about it anyone saying this was good faith im sorry but why didn't he just do any of the many non drama baity TOS baity ways of going about asking a couple clarifying questions. also people who think if something flags TOS its a bad opinion no its just a radical opinion thats not accepted by advertisers if we lived in a more conservative world where its more profitable to pander to right wingers than left wingers being gay or trans would be seen as TOS because it scares away advertisers don't be stupid about TOS in place of a moral system.

[@17thwboy]

Yea I like destiny but I notice he really hates vaush lol I watched a stream of him watching vaush and damn near every comment he made was just disingenuous and obviously showed he has some kind of beef with vaush no matter what he says

[@TeiwazTheGoat]

He talked with Destiny right after the debate too which comes across even more sussy wussy. Every-time a Destiny orbiter debates Vaush the immediately call up Destiny. It’s kinda pathetic.

[@HeyyItsDaleVODS]

I would've left the second Rose said they weren't being fed any questions and then admitted to being fed that question a couple minutes later. Bad faith and disingenuous conversations aren't worth pursuing.

[@AionAndroid]

@@TeiwazTheGoat and yet all of the lefties avoid talking with destiny because destiny CONSTANTLY makes them look bad.

[@moonmanjam9897]

How it feels to chew 5 gum Stimulate your oppression

[@ConstantineBrightt]

Ok boys let’s count the steps of This rose guy ik it is fortress arc but 1.he says he is asking vaush questions destiny gave him. 2. After call with vaush goes into destiny’s chat. 3.gets in call with destiny. 4.steel man’s vaush for a bit then talks shit about him. Sorry guys he seems like a ddger to me 🤯 edit: also hilarious about how mad he got when people were calling him a minion of destiny might have been a soft spot

[@firstwavenegativity6379]

90% of the internet political sphere is at least partly the offspring of DGG. There's no reason Rose wouldn't be

[@kingcheesus7591]

He didn’t “talk shit” about Vaush. He said he was frustrated that Vaush kept accusing him of trying to get him banned on behalf of destiny.

[@rainbowkrampus]

Sorry, I know, Fortress Arc or whatever. But their is no way this conversation even approached good faith. Rose asserted Vaush's position then doubled down on that assertion even after receiving clarification. More than once. This was horrendous behavior. Had this been a right winger, Vaush would have torn them a new asshole thirty minutes in. Rose was either completely lacking in self-awareness here, which is very hard to believe based on past behavior. Or they were being dishonest in the framing of their motivations.

[@rainbowkrampus]

I've had some time to think about this a bit. I just want to clarify that another alternative is that Rose might be running into the boundaries of their libness. This could also be a matter of cognitive dissonance. Note that while Rose acknowledges that the appropriate time to explore action outside of the realm of agreed upon social frameworks is when a group has defied said social framework. I think Rose might be suffering from the same lib impulse to over evaluate the power and potential of modern democratic systems. The problem is that, having done a bit of research into cognitive dissonance, the phenomenon is best described as lying with extra steps. Based on current understanding and my own understanding. Belief is a tricky thing. We don't control what we are convinced by. The medial frontal cortex plays a strong role in the expression of cognitive dissonance. It protects us from "social pain". The kinds of ideas and behaviors which may exclude us from the groups we identify with. When we encounter ideas which confront our basic assumptions, our axioms, we can exhibit behavior which is indistinguishable from lying. So like I said, Rose may just be hitting a wall here. I think Vaush is probably right to be conciliatory. Still, it is frustrating from an outside perspective.

[@Wiffernubbin]

Vaush said It was okay to shoot proud boys for driving by. Pretty sure that's explicitly illegal

[@spacecadet9663]

I just love how Rose Wrist accused DemonMama of stammering her way through her debate with Vaush, pretending like she had answered questions when she hadn't, and altogether engaging in debate tactics that he saw as noncommittal in nature, and then two months later proceeds to engage in most of the same tactics in this debate. It's a rookie, just asking questions, mistake and you truly hate to see it. Don't eurostep into a debate without any concrete opinions of your own unless you're down to fuck around and find out.

[@lilstevechan8427]

Rose is trying to emulate a purely logical assessment of positions but he isn't equipped to answer those questions himself. His strategy is good for contradictory viewpoints but he blows it when he has to take a position.

[@coopercordes9827]

Bro you guys are unhinged in the comments. Stay safe please don’t commit mass murder, I love you all but you guys gotta distance yourself from your parasocial daddy. You’re not gonna get genocided, don’t let vaushs fear mongering stress you out

[@goose5761]

its troubling how much they accept this insanity

[@cropcircle5693]

This conversation is a perfect distillation of why RepubliCons always win the long game. They are the house and we continue to play games for fun.

[@Armeddragon12]

For all those who question whether rose is a good faith actor. I consider Rose an honest person and I usually watch him and Vaush for debates as they have pretty similar debate styles and arguments. In fact Rose was defending Vaush and Hunter Avallone the other week from a guy who was all pissy because he didn't like Vaush's edginess and the fact that he was banned from Vaush's discord. And Heck, Vaush likes rose. lol I think Rose's questioning being "SUS" is a result of the topic being so TOS dangerous. Rose's probing questions were narrowed down so much that it started sounding like bait. Iose hit the crux of the issue when he asked Vaush if he thinks that by merely telling people to be defensive against "the fascists that are coming" that it will inherently incite people to react offensively instead of defensively. Hence why Rose compared it to Tucker Carlson fear mongering. The philosophical question at hand is "At what point are you culpable for what people do now that they think fascists are coming?" To which Vaush answered that it doesn't matter as long as Vaush himself, was being truthful. I would have to agree with Vaush since many leftists INCORRECTLY vilify Tucker Carlson for fear mongering and his replacement ideology inspiring killers. In Vaush's logic, it isn't that tucker's fear mongering and replacement ideology are bad in of themselves, they are bad because they are incorrect assessments of reality. If Tuckers version of reality actually matched what was going on in the real world then there would be no problem with fear mongering and replacement theory. However I think Vaush was wrong when he said the comparison was wrong. The comparison was actually correct since it leads us to see that fear mongering is not wrong when the threat is real, even if a few bad leftist eggs will be born out of the process. Vaush is correct in assessing that Liberals do have a blind spot, however I think this is in regards to an action causing an indirect externality of violence. (AKA a leftist goes crazy and robloxes someone who they believe is a fascist.) Hence why so many liberals don't like gun ownership. They consider the indirect possibility of causing violence from gun ownership to be so high that they literally do not arm themselves in defense from future tyrants who have already unmasked themselves. They guilt themselves into not considering actions that may INDIRECTLY cause violence even though it may be justified, I think Rose is currently reconciling with this and is why he wanted to talk with Vaush. And lastly, I think the talk about where the line is to be drawn was really messy. And to be honest, its kinda subjective. Like Vaush may think that so and so action cannot be reversed by political means while Rose may think it still can be reversed by political means. But I do appreciate that both of them, I think correctly surmised, that the line is drawn where tyrannical actions are taken that cannot be politically fixed.

[@ddurlon]

This is the best comment here

[@Revan058]

I'm willing to cosign everything you said here, yeah. I agree.

[@ExtremeDadDRAMA]

I was the person who you mentioned in the first paragraph and I appreciate the shout out

[@lx4079]

Cosigned, cause that was some real shit you just said

[@rainbowkrampus]

Fear-mongering is an incredibly loaded term to use here. Yes, it is technically correct from a "I can read the dictionary" perspective, but lets not pretend like it doesn't come along with some negative connotations. The usual implication being that one is fear-mongering in order to sway people to behave against their interest, against the interests of society as a whole or in a way which benefits the fear monger. Fear-monger is a verb or noun. It's describing an action or an agent. These uses can only be an incorrect assessment of reality when one makes a false accusation of fear-mongering. The fear-mongering is bad because it is exploitative. The replacement theory is bad because it has no basis in reality and is being spread as truth. When the threat is real, you don't have fear-mongering. What you have is advice.

[@NoodleBerry]

I feel like there’s a big gap between “buy a gun so you can fight back if sh*t goes down” and “go k*ll politicians.” I believe I’m being persuaded on the former, but I wouldn’t even try the latter. For one, I’d f*cking die, and I don’t want to get shot by secret service or some sh*t. Two, I doubt I would succeed. Three, even if I did, there’s a good chance martyrs would speed up the timeline, not halt it. Why does Rose not seem to understand the critical difference here?

[@schnoz2372]

Cause bad faith

[@brutuslugo3969]

Because vaush implied the latter in his last debate and is now walking it all back

[@wile123456]

There is a gap but still a risk. Tucker Carl's on says arm yourself, and 1000 people buy a gun. But one of them does a terrorist attack, still inspired by the rethoric tucker made. You have to be very careful when you advocate for violence like this because it can Léad to extremism and someone doing something stupid

[@JacatackLP]

@@brutuslugo3969 when?

[@sepulcher8263]

@@brutuslugo3969 Do you know the name of the previous debate?

[@zzmoonz]

Roae wrist? TIME FOR A LIBERAL MOMENT!!!

[@Gundamman]

God destiny is Cancerous to political discourse its funny how someone could be regarded and the one that brought online politics forward to then turn around and be its greatest weakness

[@Spencerwalker21]

At this point anytime destiny is brought up vaush should just say yes jealous of my dick pic that Sargon sent him lol.

[@tribuneoftheplebs9948]

Man libs are sooooooo desperate to believe that the Republicans wouldn't actually do it. I like Rose. I like his content. But you could here it in his voice how much he just wanted to believe that it can't happen here.

[@yoboiboy4182]

You guys are blowing shit out of proportion is the problem. If vaush had simply advocated for getting a gun for self defense it wouldn’t be a problem but trying to prophesize the end of democracy is very weird and dishonest. He already said his goal is to fear monger in a similar fashion to conservatives. Y’all should take what he says with a grain of salt from now on and I mean that sincerely.

[@tribuneoftheplebs9948]

@@yoboiboy4182 all he has ever said is that the gop has become an anti democratic institution with a base primed for fascism and that if they manage to succeed in their long term goals we should be able and prepared to defend ourselves. That's just pragmatic not prophecy.

[@melaniey.5596]

@@yoboiboy4182 but Vaush IS advocating for owning guns just for self defense. That Jan 6 is proof that there is a possibility that things can get horribly violent (and considering there are still living survivors of outrageous sh*t like the Tulsa massacre I don’t think that terrible things like that happening today is that impossible), so he is advocating for people to have guns for self defense in case things go sideways.

[@SM-BSW]

I think it's easy to forget just how young Rosewrist is. I think he's 19/20? He's very intelligent, and is mature beyond his years, but his lack of life experience is very apparent in this convo.

[@xenos_n.]

"Don't say that what a 20 years old says has to be taken somewhat with a grain of salt because they lack life experience or else you're being ageist" -20 year olds

[@Quaquadaqu]

Vaush is like 27. How much more life experience does he have? Lol! You people are deranged.

[@TheInflicted]

Rose was very obviously attempting to get Vaush banned in order to gain clout.

[@MrRazmut]

@@Quaquadaqu 19-20 versus 27? That's quite a difference, no? One of them just became an adult and the other has been an adult for 1/3rd of their life, almost a decade. What??

[@kelva1304]

@@Quaquadaqu 27 is solidly adult, 20 is still babybrain, sorry.

[@xerxies8947]

Having watched this live I still don't have a good explanation for why, if Rose wasn't searching for a response he specifically wanted, he asked the same question over and over and over again. Maybe it wasn't a bad faith fishing expedition but bait is bait all the same. Was he trying to see if Vaush had views that opposed his own in a way that would force him to disavow Vaush? That's the ONLY even slightly plausible explanation I can think of for why someone would ask you the same question with a couple of words changed repeatedly in a live setting. It's the same shit the cops do during interrogation to try and fool people into admitting they're guilty of something even if they aren't and it's not cute when Rose does it either.

[@captaincobop]

He asked the same question a million times because Vaush kept dodging it. I would too, the answer is incriminating.

[@bardsolas]

I think the repeat questions were just a natural consequence of the topic being quite difficult to discuss openly, so just giving Vaush the possibility to engage with it from different angles - Sadly Vaush was way too much on the defensive from the start to allow for any candid convo.. Really annoys me how aggressive he acts on a topic I agree with him a lot on and where I understand his position, I just think it's pretty bad advocacy

[@kitsunin4690]

@@bardsolas I think Vaush is autistic and it was very frustrating not to be treated as honest when he was being fully honest. I agree it is a shame he couldn't understand why Rose felt the need to continue pushing, BUT it is exactly the kind of situation that would make the autistic person I know feel extremely upset in a way that's often difficult for me to understand (they are often fully honest in situations in which others don't expect them to be, and get pissed off when others assume they are just being polite/evasive/etc.)

[@andyrihn1]

@@captaincobop the answer he gave was self defense which is not incriminating

[@wolfxda94]

@@captaincobop the question was answered the first time with self defense. Every time after that was a fishing exercise for some other answer.

[@diallo1347]

Dems: We would love to fight Fascism but the Parliamentarian said no

[@freedomofmusic2112]

I can't help but get the impression Rose was being disingenuous with his intent. It seemed like he was trying pretty hard to TOS bait despite somehow not having an opinion of his own. If he just wanted to know Vaush's position he could have DM'd him. When you want to talk to a person on stream it's for content & clout, which in itself isn't a bad thing cuz that's their job, but it is very peculiar when we learned they already talked about this exact subject in DMs months ago [56:35]. Earlier in the conversation he denied being fed any questions [13:45]. About 2 minutes later he admits he was fed a question(s), and later on we learn it came from Destiny (who was watching this entire convo). Towards the end, Rose denied having any sussy intent and asked, "how could I have watched Destiny's video before this convo?" That seemed like a very dishonest misdirection. He didn't have to watch D's video, people in the dgg sphere have already been talking about Vaush's rhetoric for weeks. Sondsol tried to bait Vaush when he hosted Hippy Dippy over 2 weeks ago and reached out publicly on twitter to debate about it. The only relevance of D's video is the fact that him & his orbiters were already having this discussion and have been vying for Vaush's attention. I think at the end Vaush was giving Rose an out to the conversation and maybe trying to not burn the bridge, but it still bothers me. Rose is a smart guy, I don't see how someone who's been a content creator for at least a couple years could be completely ignorant to the fact his line of questioning could result in Vaush's channel getting nuked.

[@lilstevechan8427]

Rose desperately wants Destiny's support and an association with his community. But little does he know, he will one day get randomly targeted by Destiny and bridges will be burnt over something stupid. Destiny loves to burning bridges with leftists.

[@warmetalpacifist]

Rose is being groomed by Destiny. Just watch his followup convo with him after this discussion. Kinda sickening

[@GeoNeilUK]

Destiny made an 18 hour video about this debate.

[@aproxy7263]

gotta get that juicy clout

[@runagaterampant]

I can't help but feel he is channeling Destiny here. What a waste, Rose is smarter than this

[@jizburg]

The Feds won this debate.

[@bazookallamaproductions5280]

rosewrist has a massive anti-socialist bias, and follows destiny. thats why i unsubscribed from him. he almost CERTAINLY was trying to get vaush deplatforned. 🙄

[@StuartAtkinson4467]

Rose Wrist was my great research document following the facts hope when he came on the scene. His critiques of socialism seemed like they were genuinely aimed at building towards, acknowledging the flaws that would have to be addressed. Then he just seemed to slide more and more towards milquetoast liberal stuff and when any statement leads to action outside of current systems/bureaucracy he laughs like it's unthinkable. I had to stop watching around the time he and Booksmarts were going to bat for Destiny along the "technically correct" ignore all context but direct death as harm schtick. He is at least more tolerable with his questions albeit fed to him from Destiny.

[@brettleighglass]

Rose Wrist is a socdem, at best. He's definitely not left

[@minhocho5487]

@@brettleighglass that is left, he is not a socialist, but he is on the left. Let's not make these kinds of bad faith arguments. They only weaken ours.

[@robinsonc5]

This is absolutely ridiculous-volish was mad at destiny for his Condoning of running over people with trucks, but now you guys are literally arguing that Luck just should be able to shoot people in trucks who look like right wingers?? How are these things any different

[@JacatackLP]

@@robinsonc5 Vaush specifically was talking about militias driving into minority communities to commit massacres, not for driving around in a truck.

[@forgottenlurker2428]

Proximity to Destiny seems to cause some lapse in judgement. I keep seeing it.

[@LDIndustries]

50:38 Yeah just recognizing that you're attempting to engage in a bad faith dynamic in a conversation doesn't make it ok that you're engaging in a bad faith dynamic. Especially because Rose did indeed get fed a question by Destiny who made a video saying that Vaush wants people to shoot right wingers. The whole "this isn't a debate I'm not gonna make a statement on this I just want you to confirm the position I've asserted for you" is very disappointing. Asserting a person's position, then doubling down on that assertion when the person has expressed the opposite, is also bad faith and something Rose did multiple times.

[@loupevl]

more like Rose Wire amiright

[@mikeymoughtin]

New rule: you can't ask for where the line is for when to take action if you don't have a line yourself.

[@mars7304]

I didn't know honeypots could take on human form

[@darestone3335]

Motte and Bailey won the argument

[@bluhmer1990]

I see people in the comments saying they like Rose Wrist but disagree with him here. I don't get what's to like, he was insufferable.