VAUSH RANTS AGAINST CHATTER | "There is no such thing as a national mentality!"

[@testoftempest]

This rant was at the end of the J. K. Rowling/Putin video. But a lot of people wanted it to be it's own video, so here you go! OG video: kzbin.info/www/bejne/ZqbYqnSbac2djM0

[@zahs1332]

thank you!! such good stuff! the last minute of this one would make a good short, too

[@ImaginaryMdA]

Good decision! It's a very good speech.

[@QT5656]

Thank you! I wanted it separately but hadn't posted a comment asking for it yet 😄

[@redlunatic2224]

YES

[@AndaraBledin]

Thank you so much for sharing this. This rant is super-based and I'd love to hear more like it.

[@Molten-Throne]

This is not a virgin cringe RANT. This is a gigachad based and epic pilled SPEECH!

[@doktorkraesch3014]

Yes it's pretty remarkable, it's like it was written. Vaush is a very talented speaker.

[@FazeParticles]

Damn godless commies. Joke. Not bad rant.

[@ThePFD518]

My dad told me the story of some he knows that grew up in Yugoslavia during the breakup. One moment at this apartment complex, people of different ethnicities were going about their business and treating people normally. Next moment people were shooting these same people they were friendly with from their apartment windows based off these differences. That really showed me how these types of attitudes can really switch on a dime.

[@AB-zl4nh]

The USA already had this, it's the American Civil War.

[@beezusHrist]

@@AB-zl4nh not quite, the American Civil War was a little more organized than people just all of the sudden killing each other

[@vl8584]

Same thing happened to the Tutsis in Rwanda during the 1994 genocide.

[@jascu4251]

I've read about this too, and its frightening. That some of these people had known each other for decades and shown no signs of these tendencies either! I've also been hearing about it happening in Russia right now, and not even based on ethnicity. I was watching a Russian KZbinr, and he said in the first 3 days of the invasion people were just in disbelief, but after 3 days people started to form into two groups anti and pro, and that once all the 'Z' stuff started coming out the positions hardened really quickly, and people started throwing around words like 'traitor', defriending each other, even within families, where there were no previous divisions. That kind and thoughtful people became militant almost overnight, people he'd known for years In an environment where people are being arrested for their views this makes things even more dangerous, as people are reporting on each other over this stuff. The fact that such strong divisions apparently completely unknown and undetected, can come to the fore so quickly out of nowhere is pretty frightening

[@SugarFreeMisery]

same in Iraq, sunni shia kurd christian lived worked and had relations with each other like totally normal, all of sudden Iraq war, and now these differences mean so much that people kill people over it. (not saying discrimination never existed in these parts before the war but it became a huge problem compared to the pasts tiny problem )

[@ulroxvladtepes4023]

Probably the most epic rant I've ever heard on KZbin, and I've been here since the beginning of the site, and have never felt this way about any rant on here

[@ordohereticus3427]

Yes.

[@GeoNeilUK]

Shame he doesn't believe a word of it. "Vaush 2 hours ago Incorrect, the British are inherently bad"

[@Baffon100]

Love it when the anarchist in Vaush comes out.

[@Necroskull388]

They’re always his best moments.

[@Molten-Throne]

This needs the vaush rad theme playing in the background while he talks, gives him more of a protag anime vibe 😂

[@binho6600]

TRUEEEE

[@darkphoenix2]

As I listened to this live I was thinking "damn, this is good" and went to the subreddit to draw attention to it in hopes it would be uploaded as it's own thing. I know Vaush is talking about something very broad here, but I feel it forms the base of my entire worldview and anyone who stands against the evil forces in our world today should be able to find common ground with us and Vaush. It's disappointing that so many online leftists are turned off by Vaush's edgy humor and debate mannerisms. I get that he may be off putting to some, but everyone has their rough edges. Listen to him speak here and tell me he's not going to be a valuable member of the movement. Come on.

[@Richard-jm3um]

My only issue with Vaush is that he doesn't do or push his subs to do any IRL organizing in a significant capacity, he raters doing online drama all day

[@shady1137]

@@Richard-jm3um misinformed. Him and his fanbase do fundraisers for real world issues all the time.

[@Richard-jm3um]

@@shady1137 Vaush has talked about the limits of charity plenty of times, he doesn't support any political action organization where his subs can organize

[@Richard-jm3um]

@@georgeykitheka Absolutely, Nick Fuentes had a conference with congresspeople and we get all worked up about who is on who's side on Twitter like it mattered, it's so frustrating... It is so frustrating because this many people would 100% be able to push for change if we worked together!

[@ngotemna8875]

@@Richard-jm3um Completely agree with you. Vaush is too big and too influential as to *not* be morally obligated to push for more IRL political action. With great power, comes great responsibility

[@AndaraBledin]

Listening to the rant about there being no "the people" I realize that it's not only very much true, but it is also an excellent demonstration that the U.S. Constitution applies to everybody on U.S. soil, regardless of citizenship. "We, the People" is _everybody on the planet_ and not just those writing the document, or those who happen to be born on the right chunk of land, but anyone who happens to step foot on the soil over which the document holds sway.

[@lloroshastar6347]

I'm glad we got this rant. This is essentially what I've been thinking for most of my life. There were idiotic bigots in my country who were anti-German for years because they fought the Nazi's in the war, conveniently forgetting that my country was the Nazi's to multiple nations around the world for centuries. My country even invented concentration camps. Its time we started directing our anger not at the people of other nation states, but against the one tribe we should be united against, the rich and powerful.

[@QT5656]

So you're from the UK too huh?

[@lloroshastar6347]

@@QT5656 Yes, I was born in the UK against my will. However, my parents are also British and they raised me against our so called 'national character'. In fact it's funny how many fellow Brits you meet throughout your life who do go against it, and how flimsy the arguments are of those who don't. But you know, reality is just a construct now, we live on the internet where the existence of anti-colonial Brits is a myth and my entire culture including all the newborn babies should be punished for the actions of those who support this so called 'national character'. Also those of us who aren't TERF's apparently don't exist either, everything leftist American twitter says is what goes apparently.

[@Bambim8]

Cringe. That take is wrong and that's that.

[@lloroshastar6347]

@@Bambim8 Yeah I'm seeing a lot of responses like this but not a lot of reasons why.

[@GeoNeilUK]

@@lloroshastar6347 "everything leftist American twitter says is what goes apparently." Speaking as someone else who was born in the UK to parents who were also born in the UK, you're not the only one sick and tired of American Leftists hating on our entire people. And it _is_ hate, it's not just a joke. You get that from the responses of dickheads in their audience when you try and point that out, telling us that British people aren't as oppressed as woman and "blacks" (because British women aren't real women and British black people aren't really black... this sentiment came from someone who is subscribed to not only Vaush, but also Philosophy Tube and doesn't understand why that take just _might_ be problematic) Also with the "BoNgErS aReN't OpPrEsSeD" argument, there's a quiet part that I will say out loud - The British aren't oppressed *_enough._* I've even seen someone defend this with a "good ones" meme, that people like Shaun, and Philosophy Tube are the good ones... y'know, like how Blaire White is one of the good transes, Candace Owens is one of the good negros and Ben Shapiro is one of the good yids. Not that we're anything like the conservatives or anything. And it's all down to good ol' American Exceptionalism. We're the ones the Thirteen Colonies won their independence from on the Fourth of July, so we become the group that's it's acceptable to discriminate against.

[@Ellipsis115]

I actually timestamped the exact moment this started on the original upload, best vaush rant I heard, more of this, BUILD THE FORTRESS VAUSHITES!

[@zen_tewmbs]

🏰 arc LETSSS GOOOOOOO

[@polandman4913]

Just wanna comment on the idea of the Kievan Rus being a 'Ukrainian Empire' as what was likely Vaush referring to. Historically, it kind of wasn't. It was more akin to a confederacy or the Eastern European equivalent to the HRE with it stretching as far as the Dnieper River to Karelia and parts of the White Sea making it ethnically actually quite diverse with Slavs, Uralic peoples and also Baltic peoples. Ethnically, the Kievan Rus wasn't dominated by 'Ukrainians', but more so the Rus. Rus has it's origins as effectively the catch all term for Eastern Slavs which comprise the likes of Russians, Ukrainians, Belarussians and so on. These groups within the Rus were obviously still separate but they were still referred to by themselves and to the outside world as just 'The Rus'. That would change with the formation of Russia by Muscovy who would deem it's self as the successor to the fallen Kievan Rus and therefore would call it's self 'The Empire of the Rus' hence the name...Russia. However with that, the 'Muscovite Rus' began seeing itself as the only Rus that could be and thus would begin the history of suppression of Ukrainian and Belarussian culture and by proxy seeing these branches off the Rus effectively cut ties with the Muscovite Rus to officially call themselves Ukrainians ad Belanussian. If you want a video to better explain this, I'd suggest looking up M. Laser History's latest video on the matter. It does the subject a whole lot more justice than I do at least. Still, hope whoever reads this found this interesting.

[@viktoriyaradosh]

Great take, thank you Vaush saying that about Ukrainian empire was funny

[@TheEnderknight]

East Slavic + Norse = Rus Rus + Polish = Northwest Ukrainian Rus + Lithuanian = Belarusian Rus + Karelian = North Russian Rus + Mongol = Central Russian Rus + Tatar = Cossack/Southeast Ukrainian/South Russian

[@Dave102693]

@@TheEnderknight is this true?

[@TheEnderknight]

@@Dave102693 I was thinking along the lines of Cultural, Legal Practices, and Language contact distribution. Those Cultures who had the largest impact on each region of Eastern Slavic Cultures.

[@KateeAngel]

@@TheEnderknight fun fact: North, like actual North Russia, Novgorod republic, was never colonised by Mongols, unlike literally all other parts of Rus. So yeah, seems like someone has an agenda to overemphasize role of Mongols in Russian history, am I right? Nowadays that is a typical point of Ukrainian anti-Russian sentiment, that part of it which is not justified, because first, pseudohistorical staff is never justified by present conflicts, second, it is full of racist implications that Asians like Mongols are bad inherently and thus any influence from them should be viewed as "dark mark" upon a Slavic majority nation. Also, you literally forgot about second largest component or ancestry in Russian nation after Slavs - Finno-Ugric peoples.

[@anthonynorman7545]

Right, THIS is why I like Vaush!

[@emachine310]

Spoiler Alert for the first Subnautica That bit about the moon and space exploration reminds me of the ending of Subnautica when you build the ship and go back home. After all that work to finally go home you are prevented from offboarding because the shuttle you built and everything you used during your adventure credited to the company that owned the ship that crashed in the first place. So there you are, stuck on a shuttle you built because some corporation owned you.

[@eelvis1674]

this rant was dope 🏰 arc ✊!

[@hackE444]

🏰 arc ✊!

[@jamesbourgeois1357]

This was a fantastic bit of philosophy. That is completely true. "National Identity" is a really strange mental construct that seems to outlived its utility and is causing more harm than good now.

[@adamski8985]

people have a right to a national identity

[@jamesbourgeois1357]

@Adamski I never said they didn't. I merely observed that it has kind of outlived its usefulness.

[@mockingbird4346]

@@adamski8985 No they don't, national identity is not now and never has been a right.

[@adamski8985]

@@mockingbird4346 yes i know ive changed my mind since then lol

[@mockingbird4346]

@@adamski8985 Well shit, fair enough lmao

[@rnelson1415]

Wow, the person Vaush directly addressed at the start was really going off in chat, some unhinged stuff. Being from Ukraine would certainly lend some feelings toward Russia but don't essentialize the people who live there. Hope they're okay.

[@EuropesNinja]

These ideas should be a crucial segment of the foundation of every leftists ideological position

[@Rhino-n-Chips]

Someone please make a version where this get louder and more deepfried over time

[@Observette]

This is one of the best Vaush videos.

[@krawieck]

Anarchist Vaush is the best Vaush

[@thomasallister3446]

Conquering isn’t individual nor national mentality, it’s human mentality. The only reason Europe did more of it than any other part of the world is because they were most able to do it thanks to technological advances. Any other culture in the world would have done the same if they had the power to do so and you’re lying to yourself if you say otherwise.

[@waldezurbe]

that's not true. you are commiting biological reducionism. even if i'd agree w/ you that there's such thing as "human mentality" abt conquest (i don't), we'd still need to explain why this mentality is prevalent in international relations (country-country) but not btw neighboors. why arent you trying to invade your neighboor's house? ppl do things for reasons, those reasons usually are biologically informed, say avoid dying, but they are socially informed too. and some social reasons can trample natural ones: suicide bombing, for example. social fenomena always need some social explanation.

[@JM-mh1pp]

@@waldezurbe every territorial species is prone to wars, hell ants wage wars. why arent you trying to invade your neighboor's house? Because the risk far outweights the rewards, but what do you think happened when state was weaker and one family feuded with other family? it was literally I want your stuff. suicide bombing is a clear example of group identity- I will die so my friends/clan/army can defeat you. You literally defeated your own explanation.

[@user-qn4xu4tq7n]

No it is inherently a byproduct of national identity a drive. A man taken care of will live their life in comfort a group of man trying to better themselves will go on till it crumbles from its own weight

[@crocve]

If you say socio-economics, you will be correct 100% of the time. If the Grand Duchy of Kyiv had united the Rus instead of the Grand Duchy of Moscow, we today would be complaining about Ukrainian imperialism. If the Swiss had expanded enough to get a sea or ocean border, we would be complaining about Swiss imperialism. In the end, geography and resources are the ultimate reason why a rulling class desires to turn into imperial expansion or not - ideology is just an excuse for such an expansion.

[@Ar1AnX1x]

I wanna hear Vaush's take on people boycotting the new Harry Potter game it's complicated in my opinion since Rowling has nothing to do with the game(obviously aside from the story-telling), and the studio making it seem to mostly disagree with her politics and they have Transgender characters in the game as well. I mean almost all the video game studios are run by Leftists, so I don't think boycotting it would even affect Rowling, it would just hurt the studio that seems to have made a good game.

[@Dreigonix]

I agree. Me, I’m gonna buy it, and if other people don’t want to, that’s fine, but I want people to know the facts of what’s going on if they think they’re doing some grand act of protest. I’ve already been trash-talked online for this, by the way.

[@settlepetal9928]

Personally I'd just pirate it if you're desperate. But boycotting a game or product to send a message rarely if ever works. This game is gonna make a lot of money regardless. What does work is making a lot of noise about it.

[@Dreigonix]

@@settlepetal9928 And if we can use this game to push trans-supportive causes, that would be fantastic. Charity streams and whatever else we can come up with!

[@Ar1AnX1x]

@@Dreigonix if people trash-talk you tell them to boycott the books and stuff that Rowling is directly involved in, boycotting a studio that supports trans-rights does nothing for the cause. I donno why some Leftists are hell-bent on making us all look stupid and ridiculous

[@Dreigonix]

@@Ar1AnX1x I feel like a lot of online lefties get WAAAAAY too hung up on what media it’s okay (read: acceptable in the exclusive social club that is the online left) for them to enjoy.

[@PeteMachini6732]

There's only one race, the human race.

[@zyanego3170]

Based.

[@cosmicbuffinmuffin5447]

What about NASCAR?

[@JM-mh1pp]

@@cosmicbuffinmuffin5447 okay...two races.

[@PeteMachini6732]

@@cosmicbuffinmuffin5447 lololololol

[@Robiness]

Vaush read that comment as "this is innate characteristic of Russians." But I'm not sure the chatter really meant it that way. They might have been referring to more of a cultural sentiment, the kind of national fairytale that is told in every country.

[@doovstoover9703]

That's his whole point though isn't it. The cultural sentiment/national fairytale is all just arbitrary. It doesn't speak to the human being born at random into Russian society, only the way in which societies are influenced by those in power. Punishing a Russian citizen for holding anti-Western views is no better than any other form of social discrimination, because you're only punishing a victim of social conditioning rather than attacking the real culprit, the system that does the conditioning.

[@ezhanyan]

the context is that before that, he was talking about how we (i guess you, i'm russian) should be sympathetic to ordinary russians, for multiple reasons: 1. obviously, the dissenters and those that had their life ruined by the sanctions 2. if we (you) don't make it clear that the world hates the government and not the people, this will feed into the russian anti-west narrative "we did nothing wrong, the west just hates everything russian" 3. which contributes to the increase in nationalist tendencies due to increasing poverty - this is a well-documented trend in sociology but a couple ukrainian chatters continued spamming at vuash "but they've been genociding us for centuries", pf tier argumentation it felt so cathartic to see vaush go on a rant like this and say "i don't care that you're ukrainian", that's what i love in his behaviour - he sticks to what he believes to be just and morally consistent even when it isn't great optics for him

[@ezhanyan]

@@Ass_of_Amalek vaush brought this up in the beginning of the rant - saying "they have a collective responsibility" applies just as much to americans and other present/past world powers. "americans share a collective responsibility for trump/imperialism/perpetuating foreign wars" - if you agree with one you also agree with the other the wording used by the chatters (there were at least two of them, you can check the vod, if you aren't the other one lol) is "they're been doing genocide for centuries", which is different from calling out collective responsibility obviously, it is true that most russians are fascists with colonizer beliefs who hate ukrainians and are open to the idea of restoring the ussr borders. i also disagree with the "they are just brainwashed people that were conditioned by the state" take, which is very popular even in these comments, because this is a deontological argument that doesn't take the horrible consequences of the bigots' actions into account however, messaging vaush with this wording in this context right after he gives his arguments for how the west should approach ordinary russians, can be interpreted as sending a different message: "i, the chatter, am dismissing everything you just said because i don't think this is important". all of this lead to vaush interpreting it as essentializing the prevalent russian mentality to the entire people (perceived) essentializing is a topic that angers him a lot, which is why he brought up all the seemingly unrelated situations - the argument he was making was that essentializing is unacceptable, no matter what context it pops up in and whether it's a marginalized person doing it or not, which is his position he has been consisting on for a long time sorry for mucho texto, i want to be nuanced on this

[@444Nightshade]

One of if not his best rant imo

[@mikel27180]

Thank you vicki for this based af segment 😅

[@viktoriyaradosh]

Welcome I guess

[@mikel27180]

@@viktoriyaradosh ❤️

[@DabIMON]

This is my favorite Vaush rant

[@sriprabhavdulla419]

The part at the end is sort of reminiscent of a line in the Bhagavad Gita, a Hindu scripture I studied before. The analogy between our current life and the clothing we wear and how they're both just things we wear for a while but eventually shed. Pretty ironic considering the mentality of religious zealots these days.

[@anirudhviswanathan3986]

Especially Hindu zealots lulz!!

[@sriprabhavdulla419]

@@anirudhviswanathan3986 yes, bc every single hindu is a zealot.

[@lupin-x2]

I am unsubscribing from the main channel because of this rant; sorry, I just don't believe that he's ever gonna top this.

[@Skarix]

This is the video equivalent of the red pill, anyone seeing this either already is or is about to be woke!

[@stanleythedoggy]

I agree with the rant, but I think Vaush read into the chatter something they didn't say - the original comment isn't necessarily essentialist IMO.

[@jascu4251]

Agree, its about nurture, environment, surroundings, not nature

[@Dimitrishuter]

They pretty clearly doubled down on this in chat. They had over 10 minutes to clarify if that was a misunderstanding and spent it raging against other points instead.

[@viktoriyaradosh]

@@Dimitrishuter i was confused, all the chatters attacked me, I was trying to reply everyone. I think Vaush still doesn’t get even the cultural aspect, had he understood correctly, there would still be a lot of westplaining shit.

[@davitdavid7165]

@@Ass_of_Amalek ben shapiro moment

[@Supergforce777]

I was there at the live stream and I couldn’t wait for this to turn into a segment

[@rampantmutt9119]

"Ukrainian empire" Nooooooooo Vaush please understand East-Slavic history before saying shit like this.

[@MakNaasfalti-jh4bg]

I imagine he talks about the Ukrainian nationalism and collaboration with Nazis and it still wouldn't be a Ukrainian empire. If it's not that...Rus? Is he talking about Rus? He can't be going all the way back to Rus...

[@ironickrempt]

Very epic Vaush moment, we like these

[@Methus3lah]

This is the type of thing I’d expect from a disillusioned gigachad speaking at the UN.

[@BLooDCoMPleX]

The main dividing line between different cultures/peoples/nations is and has always been nothing more than language and even that difference is not prescriptive, it's the most elemental social construct that we have created. Everything else is just extra shit that is added on top. That's why we focus on class and power dynamics instead of cultural differences. Everything outside of power dynamics is nothing more than negligible side effects of language barriers between cultures.

[@jascu4251]

I think this is only partially true. If I'm a 'go with the flow' gut living in Saudi Arabia my views are likely to be more conservative than they would be living here in Estonia. If I'm shaped by my environment then I'm going to be influenced by the people around me, and not rock the boat or think about things too much, I'm then going to replicate this to others as well

[@xuko6792]

👏👏👏👏👏 Standing and applauding 👏👏👏👏👏

[@justvisiting375]

Advice: play the Beware guitar solo on repeat over this

[@jascu4251]

There is a national mentality, but it comes from nurture not nature

[@zeltron5168]

who tf ever made the case that national mentality comes from genes? even neonazis don't say that shit

[@jascu4251]

@@zeltron5168 Indeed, we are shaped by our environment!

[@Charles-pf7zy]

Nations are an abstraction of the very real tendency to form groups among primates based on perceived differences and similarities

[@Charles-pf7zy]

@@lastburning yes, I am, there is no actual I. You must be buddhist

[@grymkaft]

This off the cuff rant is only one tier below the Charlie Chaplin The Great Dictator speech... Quite something.

[@OccuredJakub12]

As someone whose dad has this EXACT mentality about the Russians, I know how frustrating it sounds when someone says "it's just in their nature to be monsters" because yes, there is historical precedent and these things keep repeating themselves, but still when you essentialize it like that it's fucking not making things better for anyone. I don't think it even is about making things better; it's kinda like a somber acceptance that some people are just forever evil and there's nothing anyone can do other than just fight them back when they're particularly evil.

[@arskakarva7474]

I don't think most of us Eastern Europeans there, like me, don't think the question is in any way essential in nature (but I will readily admit that at least in my own case the generational trauma and anger at injustice makes avoiding the wrong of essentializing here a struggle), what we are concerned about is the consequences of rebuilding Russia without any kind of pre-conditions or measures that would put an end to a three hundred year political tradition of genocidal imperialism and Great Russian Chauvinism. The problem with Russia was never that they were "mistreated" in the 90's (this is important to also remember, from the post-Soviet and neighbouring perspective, Russia always got off basically with a slap on the wrist in 1991 and all the way until the invasion of Ukraine, and there was nothing unique about the "shock therapy" of Russia, the Baltic states are right next door and were far worse off in 1991 and are doing much better now). It was that Russian politics were and still are drunk on empire (case in point even Navalny is vaguely positive on the annexation of Crimea, that's how deeply the legacy of Autocracy, Orthodoxy and Nationality has dug its claws in Russian politics). The only reason it took this long to get here was just that in the 90's Russia was too weak to victimize even the landlocked and internationally isolated Chechens, and by the time Russia had recovered more much of post-Soviet Europe had joined NATO. Because it was always clear that this situation was inevitable, if it wasn't Putin it would have been someone else from the siloviki, because the Russian Empire was still firmly in place at the center of the political tradition. Like, we need a situation comparable to Japan and Germany after total defeat as a precondition before any reconstruction should be considered, where a political tradition is uprooted and left weakened to the point of irrelevance (and just to clarify, I don't mean we need NATO troops in Moscow, just the end of a political tradition). Or we will inevitably be right back here again, because the imperial political tradition was once again left to fester and bide its time. Simply giving money and expertise to rebuild an economy isn't enough. Another Russian dissident, Garry Kasparov, put it quite well in response to Navalny: Crimea and European path of development are incompatible. Extrapolating possible measures to ease Eastern European existential concerns from that, at bare minimum in regards to pre-conditions for rebuilding Russia, or even just easing any sanctions, would have to be total and unconditional Russian withdrawal from Transdniestria, South Ossetia, Abhkazia, Chechnya (extra points if they drag away Kadyrov and his goons to be sent off to the Hague as they take their leave), Donbass and Crimea. A peace constitution similar to Japan's wouldn't hurt either. Whatever it takes to kill and bury the Russian Empire in Russian politics for good.

[@fakenamebunchonumbers]

This? This almost brought me to tears.

[@TheShyDoomer]

This reminds me of old Vaush and I love it.

[@beezusHrist]

They are talking about the authoritarian mentality within Russia is the majority ideology of the populace of the people in Russia. The same thing could be said about the United States in the past and present, but the type of national sentiment that promoted authoritarianism is dying here, but it NEVER had a chance to die in Russia so acting like a large majority of Russians do not support authoritarianism is missing the point. I think that is what they are trying to say. And yes, the same mentality exists in the United States. The difference between Russia and the United States is the United States is allowed to change while Russia will remain stagnant because it is run by Oligarchs. I can just destroy Vaush's entire argument by asking this: Hey Vaush, if a national sentiment does not EXIST, what the hell was all that stuff we experienced after September 11th, 2001? Yes, EVERYONE in the United States populace did not push for war in Afghanistan, BUT there was a strong public and national sentiment to exert our power in Afghanistan as means to getting payback. There was a national sentiment for going to war, and it was REVENGE This is an example of someone's ideology getting in the way of their critical thinking faculties. Vaush doesn't want to essentialize here because he has trained himself not to, but you have to in order to understand NATIONALISM which this is.

[@beezusHrist]

Call it whatever you want: National sentiment, the overton window, public opinion.... These things exist and right now the national sentiment swings towards authoritarianism within Russia

[@viktoriyaradosh]

Yes thank you. That was me. Maybe I’m not good with words, but Vaush is not good at understanding Russia without imposing his western views on it.

[@beezusHrist]

@@viktoriyaradosh all Vaush has to do is imagine an entire country mostly full of Trumptards. Is that impossible to imagine? 75 million people witnessed what Donald Trump had been doing in the US from 2016 to 2020, and decided they wanted more of that. Is this REALLY that hard to understand? To empathize? His own ideology is getting in the way of him understanding this point.

[@Slavaisusukhrystu]

@@viktoriyaradosh Як це було неприємно дивитися як люди називають тебе нацистом, не розуміючи що вони сами стали жертвами пропаганди яка робить нас безликими

[@viktoriyaradosh]

@@Slavaisusukhrystu ну, не вперше(

[@Liquid_Smoke]

I think this is the only Vaush video I actually return to frequently. It's immensely powerful!

[@jamesmitch9792]

this isn't about a national mentality but a geo strategic goal that the russian state has been trying to get for hundreds of years if putin is gone, this will not change. you should watch Kraut's video on Russian authoritarianism for more information.

[@danielshepard1449]

Kraut is bad, he defends the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki as well as the bombing of Dresden. This is a Russian geo strategic goal though called trying to maintain hegemony in their core sphere of influence. Nothing really unique to Russia about it, this is how all great powers behave.

[@duckles426]

kraut's video on russian authoritarianism was also quite flawed. though i agree that russia is and has long been a state in which corruption is allowed and encouraged, he did, atleast by implication, say that this was an essentialist problem, not an issue to be fixed with reforms

[@jamesmitch9792]

@@duckles426 " implication, say that this was an essentialist problem, not an issue to be fixed with reforms" he is right though and that is true since they have a very large extractive economy.

[@duckles426]

@@jamesmitch9792 economies aren't essentially linked to a group of people (and, as vaush said, groups of people don't really exist, in a way), they can be changed by reforms and politicking

[@jamesmitch9792]

@@duckles426 Kraut never said Russia's were, in fact that is the problem that Russia depends on it's natural resources and not it's people, which is why they use their people as cannon fodder.

[@nicolaim4275]

I actually feel Vaush is in the wrong here, mostly because he talked past the chatter's point. Vaush has previously wanted to eradicate cultural influence from his systemic critiques, but it makes his analysis weaker. Talking about a cultural tendency is not the same as essentializing the individuals of an ethic group. It is absolutely correct that Russians are taught to believe things that make it more socially acceptable to mistreat other ethnic groups or that a certain power structure is naturally just. Individual Russians aren't necessarily affected by this cultural force, but I'm guessing that Vaush wouldn't be that opposed to comments on the American-prevalent mentality of American essentialism and how that is affected by the culture. Vaush even went through an American economic textbook at one point to show how propaganda works and the concept is basically the same.

[@viktoriyaradosh]

Plz debate him

[@kkounal974]

Good nuanced take, although tbf who cultivated that mentality? The reason the mentality exists, is because of people like Putin, is at its core, because of all the underlying things and concepts Vaush talks about here. So it doesn't take away from his rant, it's more like a sidenote that maybe he misunderstood the chatter.

[@kkounal974]

@@viktoriyaradosh He has a point, it just doesn't make Vaush wrong. Just explained why lmao.

[@viktoriyaradosh]

@@kkounal974 I mean what Vaush said isn’t that wrong, but I think he does not understand stuff that Nikolai described still

[@viktoriyaradosh]

@@kkounal974 even if I formulated my comment correct and Vaush understood the point I was trying to make, he would not agree with it. Imo

[@DeathToMockingBirds]

This is amazing.

[@zen_tewmbs]

🏰 arc LETS GOOOOO

[@NicooHere]

One of the best rants.

[@curtisyue182]

1:47 lmao true my little sis is a Kpopper and she thinks Koreans are the master race, plz do not hurt her she's young xd

[@viktor8316]

That comment would have been easily fixed if the target was changed to the Kreml propaganda apparatus.

[@meep2k]

i just watched soygon pretending to be smart for 40 minutes and the information density here is giving my brain explosive decompression

[@legion999]

"Ukraine had an empire"? Vaush what the FUCK are you talking about? No they didn't.

[@zarlei6048]

Yea, people should perhaps stop getting their historical epigenetic ethnic analysis from people that think the Kievan Rus has anything to do with modern day Ukraine.

[@Skarix]

@@zarlei6048 Non Sequitur, how does that follow?

[@Kizaru3314]

Thanks for this snippet, I didn't want to have to sift through videos in the future.

[@BlueLightningSky]

The plot twist is the chatter was from Africa.

[@carlospitol4693]

It's insane how the guy was still arguing in chat about how much russian people are bad, literally just racism

[@beezusHrist]

Russian isn't a "race" so you're just showing ignorance haha

[@viktoriyaradosh]

Yep that guy must really have some beef with Russians or something. Racist af

[@Slavaisusukhrystu]

People were also accusing Ukrainians in response though

[@janholub1559]

@@beezusHrist How do you describe hating a ethnicity then ?

[@legion999]

@@viktoriyaradosh Can't imagine why...Edit: oh you were being sarcastic

[@diogoduarte4097]

Me with essentialists in a nutshell

[@jayphailey]

Nice rant!

[@TonyAncom]

Based rant

[@doktorkraesch3014]

Vaush is a smart guy, I like him.

[@jascu4251]

A 'go with the flow' type person in Saudi Arabia and a 'go with the flow' type person in Finland will have very different outlooks, not because they are fundamentally different - but because they will orient themselves according to their surroundings and experiences. They are shaped by their surroundings, and thus turn out differently. Maybe we call this something other than national character, but whatever we call it, it still exists

[@ordohereticus3427]

And whatever we call it, can be reshaped very quickly and easily, as is already the case in a globalised world where the average “let’s go with the flow” types in Saudi Arabia are far closer to their Finnish counterparts than they’ve ever been in recent historical memory. A difference that is shrinking further at a rapid pace. That’s Vaush’s point. This is not all that different from the time Stephen Fry had to humble Jordan Peterson from his usual reactionary demagoguery about “the culture”. There is no *the* culture, there is *a* culture followed by another and another, as these things change quite swiftly over time due to a confluence of circumstances and factors. Same deal with the notion of a national character, which is even less coherent and difficult to effectively generalise, and moreover, can morph into something else over a much smaller window of time.

[@jascu4251]

@@ordohereticus3427 I do see that point, I just don't think its true. If that were true, then more autocratic regimes would be coming under more internal pressures. I think the opposite is happening. I don't think we're shrinking at all.

[@ordohereticus3427]

@@jascu4251 Sure, but there are two details that are being taken for granted here and mind you, none of this changes the fact that those massive shifts in culture and character that I’ve outline, exist, meaning that no inherent “fixed character” exists and those making a claim for such have a world of work and burden of proof to present against the preponderance of evidence that societies are in constant flux and change. It’s not wrong or a matter of opinion, that is a fact, now what term you use for it or how you explain it away is your prerogative. Anyway, as we speak, change is happening, even in those questionable regimes. Autocracies that we see today did not exist in various places a generation ago, meaning that it isn’t essentialist. In fact, autocracies themselves often stand as an excellent example of individual and public will being distorted because the corruption and concentration of power means that one isn’t really getting accurate democratic outcomes or expression of dissent. Case and point, some of the most oppressive regimes having nearly 100% election wins for insanely officious leaders. Obviously, this isn’t true and there’s a reason why such outcomes take place (rigged elections, mass intimidation, pogroms against minority elements, etc.). Even the most libertine and free spirited of citizens, in such countries, will have the basic sense to keep low and quiet lest they end up facing severe penalties or even termination by the state. Less than a generation ago, Afghanistan was a mixed state with a liberal middle and upper class and a secular constitution. This was the so-called “national character” of the country at the time. All it took was meddling and intervention from two sides over the course of around 15 years during the Cold War, to throw all of that into disarray, allowing a religiously fanatical regime to emerge that then produced a successive generation of people who knew no other options or concepts others than religious dogma, poverty and severe lack of basic education. Looking at this obvious example, it’s clear that the national character was neither secular nor theocratic: it was the consequence of the power and the politics of the time, and far more importantly, it changed rapidly, thus rendering any claims of essentialism moot.

[@ordohereticus3427]

@@lastburning See my responses above, again. If you insist on calling this a national character, then the burden is on you to prove that this is something that persists across eras and generations. Numerous examples, past and present, say otherwise. Alternatively, you can call it a national character, but then this “national character” is as fickle, transient and fleeting as public trends that barely last a few years to a few decades at most. By this token, the US national character has undergone massive changes in just the last 50 years. Think about that for a moment. That’s less than the average life span of an individual in many underdeveloped countries. Only a person caught up in ideology is going to be blind to this dead obvious fact. If there was “the character” and “the culture”, then certain parts of the world would’ve always had equal rights for women in society and politics. Something that’s clearly not the case and part of recent historical developments. Things that you guys see as “go with the flow” behaviour and current character in most Western liberal or social democracies, are things that weren’t always intrinsic to those very nations less than a hundred years prior.

[@jascu4251]

​@@ordohereticus3427 I think we may be in more agreement here than might appear. I do think the concept of national character exists, but I definitely don't think its fixed It definitely changes over time, that much I agree with. Though I don't think its necessarily heading closer together - in some instances yes, others no - as you point out, over the last 50 years Iran, Afghanistan have moved further away not toward (and a by-product of that is people who don't like whats happening start trying to leave - just as we see in Russia today, its the anti-patin people that are leaving, not the pro - this changes the character of what remains) I think of it like this, the national character of people in Norway is predisposed towards coats, and the national character in Panama is predisposed away from coats - but this isn't fixed, and could change if material conditions or environment changes

[@unfollowtheinstructions6360]

Brother, you just about killed the guy with that gigabased speech.

[@viktoriyaradosh]

I’m alive and Vaush “killed” the point which I was not even trying to make. Try thinking on your own a bit

[@bragunetzki]

Unfathomably based

[@raynepanda]

Looking at his chat is infuriating. I cannon believe these people believe the arguments they're making. They're trying so hard to trigger Vaush. And even though he cracked this time with this one comment, I'm glad these trolls didn't take over his rant. Jesus Christ!

[@viktoriyaradosh]

Wow. You really don’t think someone can express such opinion, just trolls trying to trigger poor Vaush?

[@maryanchabursky9148]

"Mentality" no, however it is undeniable that Russia political structure is prone to authoritarianism and imperialism. Unfortunately Russias modern national myth is heavily steeped in imperialism. Russia people are not responsible, however their political culture is (currently) not proned to democracy and heavily based on imperialism.

[@Rexini_Kobalt]

at least the mailman aint shooting the milkman yet lmao

[@Juel92]

Not really sure what he meant by "National mentality" but I would say that some countries have more of a cultural bias towards certain things which leads to a certain amount of that population sharing that bias.

[@lloroshastar6347]

So punish one, punish all?

[@Juel92]

@@lloroshastar6347 Omfg that's not even close to being close to what I was saying.

[@lloroshastar6347]

@@Juel92 Well no I was being facetious, but it seems so are a lot of people in response to Vaush's rant here. I don't think he is denying cultural bias at all but there are a lot of people insisting he is going for some ridiculous hot take that he isn't. This rant was in response to people in chat going against his take that the Russian people shouldn't be punished and that we should attempt to directly help the people of Russia (not indirectly) after the economic sanctions devastate their country. The response to that in chat was that they were trying to imply that the Russian people were collectively responsible for the actions of the Russian government because that's just what Russian's are like. Vaush here is critiquing the absurdity of this concept. Now people are misrepresenting this in the comments as 'Vaush is saying there is no such thing as a collective cultural bias', well in a way there isn't. Cultural biases are cultivated through decades or sometimes centuries of manipulation and have proven to be overturned in a very short time. In my country for example it was the done thing for centuries to believe that homosexuality was a monstrous sin, our attitude towards homosexuality was akin to some of the most homophobic nations in the world today, more so than Russia even, but now we have gay marriage and support for homosexual relationships is at an all time high. Why did this occur? Well it's because there is no inherent cultural bias that isn't ultimately just a construct imbedded in belief systems that have to be taught in some way, either directly or indirectly. All it will take for most Russians to change their cultural perspective is a few decades, if that. There will always be those who hang on to Putin's attitude to governance, but when you actually speak to Russian's a great many of them are against the war, they hate Putin they hate the complete lack of freedom they have but they can't say anything publicly or they will be taken away by security forces. So I don't see why this fact is evading people in the comments here. That's not to mention cultural biases shift within communities, sometimes two cities can have two completely different attitudes. I come from a Conservative community but have far left views, should I be punished for the actions of my Conservative community? Collective punishment makes utterly no sense and that's all that Vaush was trying to break down here, that tendencies towards cultural biases ultimately don't justify collective punishment because at the end of the day people are people. They are only a reflection of their so called 'national character' because their media and education has led them down that path. This can be undone.

[@eldritchtourist]

Vaush was talking about the idea of there being some inherent viciousness people are BORN WITH, not TAUGHT. This is a nature VS nurture argument and the chatter he was going off against was arguing pretty explicitly that just because you're from a certain country, you share the bloodlust exhibited by the GOVERNMENT and POWER HOLDERS of that country and thus shouldn't be given sympathy nor mercy nor help, just because of your government's choices or the propaganda you were raised with. Subjective, learned cultural bias has never been in question here but it's incredibly dangerous to equate that to being some immovable permanent soul-level force of nature people should be regarded as demons for.

[@lloroshastar6347]

@@eldritchtourist Yes I thought it was obvious (at least to me) that this is what Vaush was referring to.

[@eliasE989]

Based.

[@Liquid_Smoke]

You know, it's rough out there Being a dumbfuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu-

[@louishindle6620]

Vaush: “… as meaningless and arbitrary as clothes!” … *Two years later*:

[@sandorski56]

Agree strongly about some, Disagree somewhat on a few.

[@greyspectre7416]

This needs to be said. I hate twitter discourse on the “Russian mentality”.

[@keviscool]

Mans was spittin

[@Ace2066]

Did you cut out the "I love you too"? whyyyyy

[@goosebums67]

We’re not dealing with average levels of stupid. *This is advanced stupid*

[@absolutellienot5424]

Vaush is giving very George Carlin in this clip, and that’s not a compliment i’d give lightly.

[@johnathankoch1354]

Idk what the context is but the Russian empire was built of a Russian center, with 11 nation components (ie Kazakhstan, Ukraine, Belarus etc.). The Soviet Union, particularly Lenin and Stalin manufactured Soviet federal theory in an attempt to maintain Russian hedgemoney over these nations, making the ussr more of a continuity of the Russian empire than a departure. This theory was adopted by China as well. Also, the nation state was more or less invented by college educated elites who were pissed they were prevented from being promoted due to their ethnicity, or the fact they didn’t learn the language their empire spoke. Ie non German speakers in the Austrian Hungarian empire who were prevented from high positions due to German language requirements. Either way, ideally nationalism dies and we move to a post nation state world

[@utubepunk]

Incredibly based.

[@milescurtiswatson251]

Funny, I just got done listening to this rant in the recent JKR video 😅

[@Lucasashmore]

Vaush becomes leader of humans ark

[@Korvmannen]

Yet I still see people claiming to be on the left say "whuddaboot the Russians in Ukraine?", a lot of the time even conflating a passport with an ethnicity. Also, while it might have been *technically possible* for poorer people to migrate to another country some hundred years ago, all "relevant" land was owned already (though often Kings called dibs on remote parts not appropriate for farming or similar anyway). *There were registers of people living within a parish* (proximity to a specific church that where "their" church) beginning in 16th to 17th century in Europe. Bureacracy is very old, and having parish registers did for example in Sweden become used as a census of how many soldiers were recruited from wich parish (taking too many from a parish could create food shortage and starvation). Aaaand, that's one of the reasons why The Wild West happened. In one wave of immigration to the colony, the state would offer free fertile land for free to poor farmers in Europe that struggled (who was going to stop them from claiming as much land as they wanted if no other European already hadn't?) The colony could expand westward, all while they collected taxes and got long term prospects in western parts of the land, from immigrants self-funding war against native americans. Sure, racism is a huge part of it, but probably the biggest part of it was "just how life was" and that "might makes right" to these immigrants from Europe. Because that's how the kings had conducted themselves for hundreds or thousands of years. Obviously these farmers did not cross the Atlantic which took months and was dangerous for multiple reasons because they only were motivated by racism, they just thought they could make a better life for themselves (and didn't mind killing others to get it). Racism is a justification of killing in the name of "might makes right".

[@TheExterminatorGuy]

Wait wasn’t this just uploaded? Edit: it was a good rant tho so I don’t mind lmao

[@vinniegh1961]

But how do I know ho is evil if I don't have a box to put dem in

[@elizabethtumifabiyi4628]

Based

[@CynicalBastard]

Race is an invented [constructed] concept: as it were, what was experienced as "race", to the conception of a racist, may in fact have been at once possible: but only at the outset of ones' singular race before interacting with other races [cf. 'the Other', etc.] - Does this not make sense?

[@riverroth3688]

What is the nationality of a moon colonist? ZEON

[@bigdaddychacha]

Love ya Vaush, but I’m afraid you’re wrong here and I’m afraid you misunderstood the original comment. Russia has had almost uninterrupted authoritarianism throughout the ages. They took a break throughout the 1990s due to necessity, and they gave democracy the old college try for about 9 years before bringing back an authoritarian leader. In fact, I think Western historians may need to reevaluate the Soviet period not as democracy vs. communism but as democracy vs. a different, modern, 20th century variant of the norm, that being uninterrupted Russian authoritarianism and expansionism. Whether you consider a national propensity toward authoritarianism an essentialist characteristic or a theoretically-malleable cultural characteristic, and maybe that’s the point you got hung up on, it is certainly a thing that exists. -Sincerely, an American and Vaush fan who has lived abroad for the past 15 years.

[@jascu4251]

Yes! agree with most of this. Its definitely not essentialist though, its to do with surroundings and environment, and I think Russia never really changed from the 19th century, I think the communism/capitalism thing is kind of a red herring

[@hhsdhhsss1522]

Complete and utter nonsense the equivalent to this would be to say that since America was founded and built on the back of slave labour and colonialism and has a history of racism then it’s in the American character to be racist which is nonsense. Trying some kind of characteristic onto a people group because of their history is not useful it’s far more useful to look a countries material circumstances.

[@davidstebbins8002]

🏰 arc ✊

[@hexdiqoreprime7974]

in Minecraft.

[@anthonyminyard2715]

"They are casting their problems at society. And, you know, there's no such thing as society. There are individual men and women and there are families." - Vowsh

[@legion999]

Honestly this sounds like BS. Also are there really families tho? It's just individuals who are biologically conditioned to think they need to support and maintain social connection with each other just because they share some genes, which is pretty flimsy. Haven't we outgrown the need for families yet? /s

[@Bambim8]

There are just cells.

[@Dinofaustivoro]

América is larger than the US

[@txikitofandango]

Ian Kraszyszowski 2032

[@Slavaisusukhrystu]

Idk about mentality, but I think many Russians believe that this war and the Georgian war was moral and correct. I don't get hating them for it though. Any person can be misled.

[@legion999]

Y'know propaganda is one thing but sometimes you gotta use your own mind too, it's not exclusively propaganda's fault

[@guyincognito7979]

@@Ass_of_Amalek '"as a german" sound about right

[@Slavaisusukhrystu]

Hana IRL, can you provide a poll where the ones opposed are in the majority? Polls indicate they are just like US-ians after 9/11 right now. Again, no reason to hate them for it, propaganda is one hell of a drug, those that don’t support the war have some kind of steel nerves! 😅

[@DaeSkippy]

Vaush basically sounds like Thatcher here. There is no society, only people, no national identity, no racism until the 16th century, this is basically extreme libertarianism.

[@ecta9604]

I think that you could sorta make an argument for something like a national mentality. It wouldn’t necessarily encompass every individual in a nation, sure. But I think it still exists. I think people tend to look at their neighbours and define themselves by saying “we don’t do what they do”. This can happen in a neighborhood for *sure*, or in a city, or maybe in a nation. I’m Canadian so I’ll use my country as an example. Probably the two most socially right-leaning and socially left-leaning big cities in the country are Calgary and Vancouver. Each is the closest major city to the other (Edmonton and Victoria are small like baby), and have a pretty real rivalry. Obviously there are a multitude of individuals of varying viewpoints within each city, but I’d challenge any Canadian to say that the general flavour doesn’t exist. It’s almost like they encourage one another to greater and greater heights. You can also definitely scale that kind of attitude up to the way that Canada and the US interact. Canadians seem to have a tendency to define themselves using terms that are opposed to common American tropes - polite, stable, not overtly patriotic, so on. Again, not every Canadian is a paragon of these attributes, nor is our perception necessarily accurate, but I’d challenge any Canadian to honestly say that this isn’t how the majority of us see ourselves and our fellow citizens. I think this is something a whole lot like a national character.

[@eragonship4929]

Kinda but you probably see how the existence of your group is predicated on existence of the "other" group and it's perceived differences from you. Obviously most Canadians don't want to become Americans and/or subjugated by the US government but that feeling mostly exists because of how batshit crazy our government is and how radical and terrifying many Americans and the American political discourse seems which in its own right is largely based on separating groups of people. White people from black people, men from women, immigrants from native born Americans, liberals from conservatives etc. so the existence of your group is dependent on the existence of the group called "Americans" who are in turn based on the existence of their individual subgroups and on and on it goes

[@beezusHrist]

@@eragonship4929 useless...

[@jascu4251]

@@eragonship4929 Right, so the differing histories of Canada and America shaped the way their populations are, there's nothing inherently different between Canadians and Americans, yet the two countries have many differences

[@eragonship4929]

@@jascu4251 we're going in circles here. Yes, history shaped those groups but the only reason it did was because of the existence of the nation state. That's the argument. Any perceived large scale differences between Americans and Canadians only exist because of historic momentum to separate groups and current efforts by both government to keep control. The same way there were differences between white people and black people during slavery, the same way there still are differences between the two. They only exist because someone in power benefited from separating the 2 groups and forcing them to be distinct

[@jascu4251]

@@eragonship4929 True! Though it also happens in smaller structures too, rural and urban populations have different characteristics too, so in some ways we replicate these influences ourselves

[@implicitdifferentiation]

🏰arc baby!

[@Problematist]

Vaush mad Vaush rad

[@Dartyus]

I think Vaush is being a little reductive here. One concept I adhere to is the concept of a national or cultural trauma. For a lot of Brits it's the Somme, that's kind of the place the British Empire went to die. For American's there are a few. First of all, I bet Americans can probably name more deserted sandbars in the Pacific Ocean than they can name other countries, because the Pacific theatre against the Japanese was so brutal. And while it's probably more of an actual, present trauma than a national or cultural trauma, 9/11 has almost certainly had a permanent effect on the American psyche. This idea that nations don't exist isn't very compelling. Inclusion in a nation-state is an incredibly powerful feeling. Maybe that's because of the massive amount of ritual placed around the nation-state, but denying the reality of those feelings is an uphill battle. That and saying that national economies don't exist is weird. I get that in a globalized economy nation-states can probably be excised from the picture and everything otherwise would continue to run smoothly. Rather, the reason we assign parts of an economy to a nation is, like a Go board, there are certain assets that act within an economic niche entirely determined by the nation-state through application of both soft economic power and hard power. We call the Chinese billionaires "The Chinese Economy" because those assets could be seized by the state literally tomorrow. Likewise, America has a history of doing this for national-security measures. No one would argue that Ford is squarely a part of the American economy, and Honda is part of the Japanese economy. And Honda's American division is not really part of the American economy, because if it were seized by the US, it's likely a majority of what makes Honda America "Honda" e.g. the production chain, trademarks, patents, even the brand recognition would be severed from it, and its assets divested into an American company like Ford.