His argument: Ukraine and Russia aren't populated entirely by angels so therefore we can't determine which country, the aggressor or the victim, is truly wrong.
See also: Ukraine has some Nazis, so they deserve to be invaded by the certainly-Nazi-free country of Russia. :V Question: When people ramble on about Crimea and the Donbas in this manner to justify the Russian invasion, are they knowingly distorting these events, or have they been deceived or misinformed? I honestly can't tell if Russia simps know Russia is in the wrong but want to support them anyway for some reason, or if they genuinely believe that two wrongs don't make a right and/or that Ukraine is the true villain in this scenario. Thoughts?
Literally any average person: "Hey, I think that invading a country and doing a bunch of war crimes is really bad thing to do." Weirdos on the internet: "Heh, 'good' things and 'bad' things, like in your Marvel movies?"
I just love how this "libertarian" person is advocating for the strong federal government, establishing "peace" by oppressing its population. Truly a libertarian of all time.
Libertarian just means whatever is suitable at this point. Vaush took the right approach using it, that way nobody can misrepresent his positions by pure ideology alone. Well, as much as that actually affects it, anyways...
I just don't understand how he brings up Laos without the contradiction that it was ultimately Vietnam that invaded Laos occupied them and overthrow their Maoist government something the u.s. failed at and then were themselves invaded by china
yes. it is quite the self-own. it's one of those classic Vaushisms like when Vaush declared that H2O is not water in Mexico, because water is "aqua" there.
"Adolf, we're both intelligent adults. I think if we just chose different words we'd find we have lots of common ground. I denounciate you for attacking Poland but I also don't think the jews in the Warsaw Ghetto should've attacked your SS troops, it even resulted in 2 civilian deaths"
Every time this guy complained that Vaush's "I think good things are good" was simplistic, I wanted to yell at him "yeah! he's dumbing it down so you can understand it!"
I love how this guy is so buried in his lack of a moral framework that he literally CANNOT COMPREHEND that Vaush actually has one. It's not that he disagrees with Vaush's morals, but he cannot fathom having them in the first place.
He has them some times and some times he doesn't. He doesn't lack morals, just a frame work of it. All his morals are very woo. He claims to have principles, but he is constantly violating is political principles. Mostly because political principles are dumb and incoherent. Vaush in the other hand has ideological principles. Like the last thing he says is "Ethics can't be applied to what countries do". But he is very happy to apply ethics to nazi Germany. He's a stupid hippie.
This guy floundering while trying to understand the nuance in the various scenarios he brought up was extremely frustrating. I've had conversations with people who have a similar inability understanding certain concepts at work and it goes along a similar track.
@@William-Morey-Baker You totally missed his point. He wasn't saying the pope was a leftist, what he was doing was demonstrating the dishonest tactic the libertarian was using. He was attacking leftists, while claiming to be one.
Him bringing up Starship Troopers when Vaush said something as uncontroversial as "Violence is the root of all political power" was such a soy moment from him
@@the-gadfly4743 the only way to have soft power is to have hard power first, so it is derivative of hard power. A state's ability to project culture and ideology is directly related to it's ability to kill people. Without violence, there is no soft power.
I just can't ignore the basic principle of war or any conflict in general. It always the defender, who chooses the war. Aggressor in ideal wants to achieve his goals peacefully and without bloodshed. It is upon defending side to decide to give the fight. Clausewitz wrote about it in his book On War in 1800s. Using the argument of 'wasting' human lives, you are playing in hand of aggressor. If Ukraine is willing to fight, we must support them to ease their burden.
@@longarmistice It's not true. If you remember Nazi Germany, they never wanted this "without bloodshed" stuff, they wanted to kill, they wanted to kill Jews, to kill LGBTQ+ people, to kill communists, to kill Jehova Witnessess... If they were let to invade, it would NOT be "without bloodshed", it would be THE bloodshed. Putin regime may not YET be as horrifying, but being LGBT is already outlawed and judged akin to terrorism, people are murdered (Nemtsov, Politkovskaya, Navalny...), people are put in prisons for 25 years because of what they said, murderers are let loose on the streets to murder again after they participated in the war for a bit... There IS bloodshed in this regime right now, and it will become the rule whenever it reaches. So, no, not "without bloodshed" here actually. I guess a claim could be made that "you could just give them your Jews, your gays, etcetera, and save your own lives", but that's complete destruction of a nation, betrayal of your own people for personal benefit.
"I am far from defending any atrocities. And now watch me defend one atrocity by citing other atrocity...!" - for this guy, two wrongs suddenly make right, it seems.
Buddy is utterly Dunning Kruger pilled. Never seen someone with this amount of unearned confidence, and even then, i think after 2 hours+ of not being able to actually defend their position or even answer basic questions *most* people like this would have the self-awareness to *stop*
They probably thought that if they're 2 hours into the debate they must be putting up a scrappy fight. Their brain seems to operate off nothing but vibes
Didn't over 5 million Ukrainians flee the conflict areas which contributed to the lower civilian dsath rates? Russia has been raising cities to the ground that had civilians remained in them, the civilian death toll would be MUCH higher. Also the Poles took in a lot of Ukrainians. Badasses.
Not to be too pedantic, but the word you want is ' razed' instead of 'raised.' Even though the pronunciation is almost the same. Which is why it's such an easy mistake to make. Edit: and autocorrect is such trash.
Dude Mariupol alone has to be around 100,000k+ Deads the only way to findout the real number is when the war is over and areas like Mariupol are liberated.
I already commented this in YT chat during the debate: His argument that "Russia will raise citys to the ground like they did in chechnya" is missinformation. If the russian army wants to remove citys that are far away from the front line they need aircraft. Missiles can not do it, they are too expensive and they don't carry enough payload. The only other option is atillery but atillery has very short range meaning the russian army has to actualy be within smelling distance of the city. In Chechnya the russians had air supiriority. Thats why they were able to level citys. In Ukraine they do not have air supiriority. Ukraine has extremely strong air defense. They have thousands of S-300 missiles and a mobile and well coordinated network of radar systems which they inhereted from the soviet union. If the russian air force wanted to defeat those air defenses they would need to fly SEAD and DEAD missions which they are incapable of doing. So in conclusion: The only way the russians can level citys is by getting their army withing atillery range. And the only way we can prevent that is by sending Ukraine enough weapons and supplys to prevent the russians from advancing and to kick them back out.
1:30:20 really gets to the heart of all this. This is the emptiest debate in the world, the dude just wants to hear himself pontificate and play devil's advocate for the worst individuals imaginable. As if there's so much nuance to the discussion of whether actual death camp-operating nazis had to be dealt with instead of just lobbing "let's all get along" platitudes at them.
Russian military doesn't want to kill civilians, you say? Damn, Russian targeting equipment must really be bad seeing how they kept directly hitting populated residential blocks and shit.
Not to mention that we have records of at least one big massacre on Ukrainian civilians...it's not like they don't want to do it, they are just so bad in their strategy that they haven't really gotten around to it as much as they would usually. And some of their victims have just labelled soldiers after they died.
Well, not meant to defend them, but it is (their targeting is really bad). One of the reasons they target buildings and locations is because they are on any available map, and they don't move. They were there 5 years ago when the satellite image was taken, and the Russian's are pretty sure the building didn't move. They can't target things like the HIMARS because they **have almost no deep recon ability** so they literally don't know where they are.
@Roon3808 funny how you forgot to mentioned that the Ukraine has been using civilian as meatshield. This includes them using civilian infrastructure as military bases hospitals, schools, etc. And than blame Russia for targeting them. .
@Roon3808 funny how you forgot to mentioned that the Ukraine has been using civilian as meatshield. This includes them using civilian infrastructure as military bases hospitals, schools, etc. And than blame Russia for targeting them. .
@Roon3808 funny how you forgot to mentioned that the Ukraine has been using civilian as meatshield. This includes them using civilian infrastructure as military bases hospitals, schools, etc. And than blame Russia for targeting them. .
@@swanprideand when you can't be forward about your goal then all you'll do is lie and trick people and idk how people fall for the shit and arent like skeptical like fuck
The entire conversation is pretty much just the Putin simp not understanding situational ethics. As a general rule it is bad to kill people (because people die when they are killed). However, if someone is attacking you and you have no idea whether or not they are attacking to kill you, with you having very few options available to you, it is better in that situation that you defend yourself by any means necessary, up to and including killing them. In other words, even though there is a general rule of "it is bad to kill people", we can add in caveats, where we can make a rule to permit such actions (i.e. "...but it can be good to kill people under these circumstances.") without actually making it an outright contradiction. But, for some reason, the Putin simp boils it down to something akin to "Me don't understand...you say that it's bad to kill people...but then you say that it's good to kill people?!😵💫"
It's strange how often this guy brought up Mao and Stalin expecting Vaush to support them when he has literally never supported either leader and in fact has repeatedly and publicly talked about their failures.
1:54:20 "If Putin had applied to NATO when he first wanted to in 2001, and NATO would have accepted him, boom the whole thing is solved right?" Wrong. Every time Putin tells this story he leaves out important details. NATO is more than a team with a flag, it is a machine with its own systems and structure, and to become part of it you have to go through a process. Putin wanted for Russia to become a member without any of that, just "ok, you're a member now" which is not how NATO works.
okay... that's it, 1 hour in and im done... Vaush has the patience of a saint... super glad he wouldnt allow that weasle to get past claiming Ukraine wasnt a democracy ...
@@William-Morey-Baker done the whole 3 hours, and I can promise you we both got the same experience but you got it 2 hours quicker, the guy vaush is taking to is a black hole of conversation
The lengths people will go to to get out of a conversation with a libertarian. Little did you know you were bare seconds away from escaping without having to make that sacrifice.
Def hitting that point where it's hard to tell whether he's genuinely delusional enough to think that you can speech skillcheck every problem IRL, or if he's just trying to spread dumb, unworkable methodologies as an information warfare/sabotage tactic.
@@BackwardsPancake He's a libertarian who thinks you can have decentralized law enforcement without a government that isn't just feudalism with corporations. He's genuinely delusional as are all An-Cap-type libertarians.
@@BackwardsPancake , boom, there it is! That's my basic question about tankies and other Russia simps. I often cannot tell who's just delusional and dumb and who's knowingly sowing misinformation and confusion for some greater aim.
@@dinosaysrawr The sad part is that unless you have very thorough background information on the speaker, it is kind of impossible to tell. The concept of "useful idiots" is not new by any means, and propagandists of all sorts will try to use that as cover. It's not really limited to matters explicitly related to the war either, since Russia has a long track record of helping to manufacture internal conflict among their enemies just for it's own sake - Like how they ran both pro-BLM and pro-police social media groups during the Floyd protests, or how they ran anti-vax groups during the pandemic, or how they have been funding weird isolationist parties in Europe since forever. I guess the best we can really do is remember the basics: That even true information can be presented in ways which are manipulative, and that we should analyze not only what we were told, but by whom, and what they were hoping to accomplish by telling us. And, if there is sufficient doubt (and especially if the statement comes off as engineered to provoke some sort of visceral emotional reaction), then to take the statements with a grain (or mountain) of salt.
The marriage analogy is fucking awful. An actual analogy would be as if the husband had a large amount of control and constantly overstepped boundaries and the wife decided to divorce resulting in the husband breaking into her home and beating the hell out of her.
And vaush began saying that and the moment he did frameworks completely changed it. Frameworks makes an example, vaush corners him in his own example, frameworks changes the example, repeat for 3 hours
"All I am saying is give Putin... I mean peace... I mean give Putin a chance to give Peace a chance, right Vaushes Chat? Shouldnt Ukraine give Putin's peace a chance? Vaush, your chat agrees with me..." Willfull ignorance is fun for only so long. This debate hurt!
I had flashbacks to Michael Tracy when he said that his goal for these conversations was "for both of them to reach a mutual understanding of each other's positions." I'm pretty sure Michael Tracey said something very similar.
This guy's plan for insurance reducing violence is that a court (not insurance) fines the perpetrator into poverty, which he states mere minutes after correctly observing that increasing material well being reduces violence. Does he have any semblance of internal consistency?
Like literally as well vaush was explaining what he would do with the concentration camp. I was like everything that vaush saying is correct because that actually happened lol. When the third armor division liberated Bergen belson, it's estimated that they executed upwards of 50 SS guards. Hearing a literal jewish person said that he wouldn't have done. That is the most brain dead thing I've ever heard in my life.
@@vgmaster9 I'll be honest dude I can't be asked to suffer the brain death of watching it again. It was infuriating enough the first go round, sitting in my room yelling at a recording to get to the point.
The guest spends far too long trying to set up his arguments, only for the arguments to turn out to be built upon wrong information and faulty assumptions. 1. NATO doesn't pose an offensive threat to Russia (except in the trivial sense that all independent countries pose potential threats to all other independent countries). 2. If Russia mistakenly believes that NATO poses an offensive threat to Russia, then NATO is not obligated to strip naked and bend over to disprove that belief. 3. It doesn't matter whether or not Russians believe that Ukraine ought to be joined with Russia; what matters is whether or not Ukrainians believe that Ukraine ought to be joined with Russia. 4. People don't have to choose between declaring all revolutions to be good or all revolutions to be bad. They're allowed to vary their opinion based on the purposes and manner of the revolution. 5. Whether the 2014 Maidan revolution was rightful or not, whether the 2014 Maidan revolution was lawful or not, has nothing to do with whether or not Ukraine was a legitimate country in February 2022. 6. If people in Donbass were unable to vote in a Ukrainian election because armed insurgents made the security situation too perilous for Ukrainian election officials to go to Donbass, then that is the fault of the insurgents, not the Ukrainian government. 7. There is no evidence that the Ukrainian military targeted civilians while fighting the Russian-backed separatists in Donbass 2014-2022. There is plenty of evidence that the Ukrainian military targeted armed insurgents in Donbass during that time. The number of civilian victims of the conflict reported during that time was normal for a conflict where both sides were employing artillery against each other in populated areas; it is indicative of collateral damage, not attempted genocide. He probably implied a lot more faulty statements than those, but I lost track of them while reading between the lines for 3 hours.
This libertarian: I don't want us to get too wrapped up in the broad details of countries, I want to focus on the wellbeing of people, like a true libertarian would. Also This Libertarian: We cannot help people until our country has a literally perfect foreign policy record.
...and Ukraine doesn't have a right to exist as an independent nation until it has a perfect record, and it deserves to be absorbed/conquered by a neighboring country with a *terrible* record!
I remember this stream. My brain literally melted and leaked from my ears listening to this dudes brain literally twist itself into a Möbius strip of mental gymnastics. Like who is he kidding? 100% this guy has Noam Chomsky NFTs
@Cultured Anime Waifu 3.0 the Russians lost Kherson, Izium, Kupiansk, Lyman and dozens of smaller towns in the time it took the Russians to capture soledar. It's might make a difference in bakhmut at the most, but it's as war defining a capture as pisky was. ✌️🇺🇦
1:18:55 "I'm a libertarian, I've specifically said I opposed violence" Yeah that sounds a lot more like the right wing definition of libertarian where they claim to care for nothing but the NAP but in reality just don't want violence done on them.
@Bob Smith When that includes opposing self defense against fascists, yeah. Was also true of "America First" advocates against fighting the Nazis in 1939. Advocating for surrendering to fascists in the name of "pacifism" is right wing.
@Bob Smith Hello Bob Smith, I'm glad to see that your frontal lobe lobotomy didn't claim your life. However it seems to have left you with an inability to comprehend the written word.
Libertarians - the universal punching bags of ideological conversation 😂 Sam Seder destroying libertarians is some legendary stuff if y'all wanna dig, some good Michael Brooks in there too 👍
You know how many Russian oligarchs want the war to end because their yachts got confiscated or whatever? It's like that but on a larger scale, assuming I'm thinking of the same thing as him. A very Hamilton-esque idea that economic investment encourages stability. Now how he plans to implement this logistically, especially since he seems anti-UN, I have no idea.
@@happycamperds9917 Keep in mind economic stability doesn't mean the rich people in Russia getting their Yachts back. Russia had money and economic investment but most of that went to the top thus creating instability. You would have to change the whole hierarchy in Russia with dramatic restructuring to pull off anything that is gonna give Russia economic stability and for that you're gonna have to get rid of old guard and Putin and the new people have to not be corrupt otherwise you're just gonna end up in the same situation. I don't know how you do that peacefully Also keep in mind that there are a lot of reasons for people to war and money isn't the only one nor is it the case with the Ukraine war. OR you know every country on the planet is a good example because every single one no matter how economically stable has been in a war over the past couple decades.
Imagine if we handled car accidents with this man's logic "now he may have been driving drunk but I don't assign blame I find it useless in solving problems"
The point where the guy started listing countries that agree with him to frame the general consensus on this conflict as Pro-Russia was only topped by the moment after where he said that he was actually trying to understand how you square being a leftist with being pro-Ukraine. I can't stop thinking about it.
This is why I don’t want to be grouped with leftists because this guy and all the tankies think they are the left. Frankly I’d rather not swim in that pond.
Also how he said Vaush was the one who conflated governments with the people. Directly after saying billions of people agreed with him just because the governments do.
Supporting Ukraine isn't leftist it is pro-US imperalism that it. The entire War is cause by the US empire and if you think otherwise than you are just a lib not a leftist. The idea that a leftist is pro-Ukraine is completely antithetical of being a leftist and Vaush isn't a leftist either but a lib and he has proven this time and time again. This guy will support the US empire at everyturn and it is staggering how many people who thinks they are being leftist while they are just a lib
@@ericmacrae6871 Ukraine is an independent nation Russia invaded after many agreements they would not. The only imperialism happening is from Russia literally trying to annex a neighbor state.
@LizFallingUp How can Ukraine be an independent state when the US did a neo-nazi coup in 2014 to install a puppet state? How can Rusia honor his agreement when Ukraine regime has broken every single treaty with Russia and they never had any attention to do so? They have openly admitted that they never attended to honor the Minks agreements. They simply used it as a way to delay the war as much as possible while they were building their NATO troops. Lastly, how can Russia be the invader when Ukraine was the first one who lunch an invasion of 100k men into the Donbas BEFORE the Russian invasion.
'You sound like a statist, oh and I think Russia is a democracy with free and fair elections while Ukraine overthrew their democracy' that was provided by a Putin loyalist.
Commented this on the stream, but my god the psychic damage I take the second someone says "If we could all just listen to each other" is visceral. Its almost as bad as when I lay out why someone is wrong and then they start nodding like Im agreeing with them...oh wait that also happened here. "I think we should eat poop and also bad thing bad" "I mean yeah bad thing is ba-" "See Im glad we are in agreement with what I said previously"
@@rainbowkrampus its so frustrating. The worst is with wu peddlers and pseudoscience nuts. They start using words like quantum and fractal and just nod along when you explain the actual definitions.
@Cultured Anime Waifu 3.0 I've seen photos of the city. I don't even understand why would Russian supporters be happy about what they got. Only ruins are left. It won't be rebuilt within my lifetime considering low (negative) population growth rate(both of Ukraine as well as Russia) and its closeness to a very hostlie border. It will become a ghost town There're villages like this in Poland. They suffered a lot during WWII and under Soviet regime. Nowadays they're just points on a map, obscure tourist attractions. This is Russia's Mir. This is what Putin is striving to achieve
I get these people so mixed up, is this the guy who wanted to stop the war but wouldn't say that Russia should stop invading? Edit: after 10 minutes I still have no idea what point he's trying to make halp Edit 2: ohhhhh it's the blame game guy oof
2:25:40 it isn't that vaush literally is just "for good things and against bad things", it's that his STANDARD for determining good and bad is based on harm and how much harm an action will have. In this case, Russia succeeding will have much worse outcomes, so therefore it makes sense to not support them.
@manco82 well wait a minute, I didn't say pure utilitarianism. It would be utilitarian, technically, if nobody drank alcohol, but the reality of the matter is that that can't happen and it's never happened. So, we set reasonable guidelines around utility maximization, subject to certain constraints (freedom consideration, the effect of one thing on a host of other factors).I never said pure utilitarianism is possible, and now that I think about it, it isn't desirable.
For some reason, I listened to this live until an ungodly hour in the UK. I've since concluded the sleep deprivation wasn't terribly worth listening to this nincompoop waste Vaush's time for 3 hours. His looping diversions to things that had nothing to do with what they were talking about reminded me of an old Matt Dillahunty line: "What is this, non sequitur hour?"
Never heard Dillahunty say that one but its apt. Being sleep deficient the next day is never worth it for a Vaush debate. Then again I sometimes listen to them at work which is basically means im bombarded with idiocy from every angle so what do I know. Honestly, you have to be at your best to shrug off the lingering effects of weapons grade stupitonium or worse when he debates active "left" reactionaries, ethno-nationalists, uberfrau She-Ra Man Hater Club (TM) feminists, and red fascists. Professor Flowers. Jabson Hankle. The pencil idiot. So many others who are vile sub-humans who, if they ever got near power and achieved their goals, would find a coalition of nations invading where ever they are to depose them (assuming they don't have nukes). After some Nuremberg-style trials, they'd all be left dangling. Then there are the useful idiots doing apologia for them like Noah Samsen and Big Joel.
It’s like 4 in the morning for me. I pushed through with you. Thank you for being one of the few leftists in the UK, or at least that’s what I’ve seen from there, there seems to be this bizzare stigma for leftists in the UK, you have to be a centrist right or centrist liberal, nothing else. Also I love that automatic Shakespearean insults you guys can whip out even at your sleep deprived mind rn.
>russian invasion of south and east and it’s occupation is a minuscule reason of why votes on occupied territory were not counted. That’s a popped vein on my forehead.
@@unclebobboomergames Seems like that bot network has been banned for a while, but this guy might as well have been one of its operators for his inability to respond or engage with any points.
I used this to get me through two hours of cardio, listening to the inability to understand ethics even at a very basic level was so infuriating that I could channel it into rage filled running energy.
I found that the biggest gap between understanding of 2014-2022 events in Ukraine can be resolved if people on the West would read a Wikipedia article 'Igor Girkin.' In Ukraine and Russia, he's like a superstar political commentator right now, living on the basis of his former fame. In the West, people didn't even know that he is the Russian secret agent that: - forced Crimean deputees under the gun point to force referendum and to assign a pro-Russia stooge with a 5% seats in the Parliament as a Crimea emergency leader - turned protests in Donbass into violent insurrection sheerly by his militarily involvement - became a Surpeme Military Commander of Donbas - gave an order to hit what turned out to be the Malaysian Boeing
*Tankie (sorry, "Libertarian"):* "I wanted to call in and kind of have a calm, rational conversation..." *Me:* _[scooches forward, leans towards screen, resting my head on both hands with my elbows resting on my desk, attention fully engaged]_
Let me very autistically put this in Magic the Gathering terms. This guy thinks he can be the perfect lockdown control player and create a boardstate where the combat phase doesn't happen. Ok. But Russia slipped in a Craterhoof Bahemoth and it's the combat phase. What do you do? This guy, probably: "Well if I drew a Humility last turn, I would have played that." Ok but you DIDN'T so how do you proceed in our current reality where that didn't happen. This guy: "....." "Let's talk about state-based effects for a moment because--" AAAAAA-
The part where he does everything in his power to not say out loud why the population of Donbas weren't allowed to vote after the Russian invasion almost did me in
When I watch debates I try to focus less on the back and forth arguing/ debunking etc and just pay attention to the fresh, proactive arguments people make when they have the floor. It's amazing how hotblooded people are, how hard they work to get onto a platform, and then they make these flaccid, unimpressive arguments like they're clocking in at a job.
As a European, nobody invading anybody is such a basic rule that everybody should stick to … no sovereign, independent country gets invaded. Not a difficult rule … so the invader needs to go home. How anyone can argue on the invading country behalf is beyond me…
Okay let me sum this up Caller: I don't want anyone to get hurt Vaush: good me too. Caller: Shame we pushed Russia to invade Ukraine. Vaush: We didn't, he invaded and needs to stop. Caller: No!!!! WHY DO YOU WANT EVERYONE TO DIE!!!!! Vaush: -_- why do I even try
"Did Ukraine have troops in Russia?" "They had troops in The Donbas" so Ukraine had troops in.. Ukraine? This guy is like whatifalthis and how he's incredibly dishonest how he frames things
The Wikipedia part at 1:05:00 is hilarious. "it's on Wikipedia" "you can't trust Wikipedia" "Wikipedia is lying" "I'll read from the article [vaush looks up article to follow along] uh I can't do this live uhhh its a big article"
It's honestly jaw-dropping how he keeps calling your worldview simplistic while at the same time demonstrating a complete inability to understand nuance and context.
Dude starts speaking about the conflict in Yemen, then it takes him 15seconds to show that he knows basically nothing about that conflict. And before he completes his point, which wasn’t exactly great to begin with, he just stops as even he manages to sus out that he has no clue. This was painful.
Bro is just straight up lying and when Voosh calls him on it he's like "Well this isn't fair, you're not giving me 60 seconds to explain." Voosh is a saint for going through at least 9 hours of agony talking to this guy over 3 debates if you can call them that.
Thanks for the torture video. I went insane because of it. I went outside, clocked a random guy on the street, dragged him to my basement, cuffed him to a pipe and made him listen. Now when he's ready there will be two of us.
This was such a good example of over educated and zero sense. You start out thinking wow he knows so many historical facts. Then he states facts and draws connections and conclusions and your jaw just drops at the idiocy.
I love how his proposed solution to violence was a weregild system like 9th century England had. A time period where you could legally kill a person as long as you had the money to pay the fine
Debates like this always make me feel like I've just run a marathon by the end, I never want to do it again yet somehow I always see it all the way through next time around
My brain hurts. Nothing he says makes any sense. "What should we do about Russia invading Ukraine, TODAY." "We should invent a time machine, go back in time, and alter nothing."
this discussion is made more annoying by the fact that "yes, i agree it would be preferable to solve problems without resorting to violence" is, i would assume, the predominant position of every living human on earth that isn't a total fucking psychopath.... thats great, unfortunately we don't have a time machine to allow us to unfuck every situation that escalates to violence... and this guy doesn't seem to understand that
The "only 7000 civilians dead" argument is dishonest: the stats provided are from the OHCHR citing verified deaths only, as provided by the Russian and Ukrainian governments. In other words, cities under Russian control, like Mariupol, are likely not accounted for, making the actual estimate much higher.
1:49:18 HOLY SHIT IS THAT WRONG. I'm a former Yugoslav citizen of Croatian, Slovenian and Montenegrin descent and I felt the stupidity of that statement in my genes.
@@LizStaples This man's politics are like letters generated by AI. You can tell it's supposed to be letters, you can almost make out some words, but it's a mess that makes no sense.
![ATEEZ(에이티즈) - [GOLDEN HOUR : Part.2] Preview](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/X4PfgRPBUVo/mqdefault.jpg)
![YoungBoy Never Broke Again - Catch Me [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/KxwEXXFQMTY/mqdefault.jpg)
His argument: Ukraine and Russia aren't populated entirely by angels so therefore we can't determine which country, the aggressor or the victim, is truly wrong.
pretty much the worst possible argument on the subject... or just about anyway...
Probably the same person who says George Floyd was a drug user so it was his own fault
No shit. It's pure absurdity. Russia invaded Ukraine. Dude is hurt about Ukraine defending themselves. How is this a 3-hour conversation?
See also: Ukraine has some Nazis, so they deserve to be invaded by the certainly-Nazi-free country of Russia. :V
Question: When people ramble on about Crimea and the Donbas in this manner to justify the Russian invasion, are they knowingly distorting these events, or have they been deceived or misinformed?
I honestly can't tell if Russia simps know Russia is in the wrong but want to support them anyway for some reason, or if they genuinely believe that two wrongs don't make a right and/or that Ukraine is the true villain in this scenario. Thoughts?
"anthropomorphize"
Literally any average person: "Hey, I think that invading a country and doing a bunch of war crimes is really bad thing to do."
Weirdos on the internet: "Heh, 'good' things and 'bad' things, like in your Marvel movies?"
Very entertaining to see, albeit irritating 😂😅
I just love how this "libertarian" person is advocating for the strong federal government, establishing "peace" by oppressing its population. Truly a libertarian of all time.
These knuckle dragging libertarians only think America can be a big government
Libertarian just means whatever is suitable at this point. Vaush took the right approach using it, that way nobody can misrepresent his positions by pure ideology alone. Well, as much as that actually affects it, anyways...
There’s no such thing as a RW libertarian. They’re just fascist capitalists who stole the term.
I just don't understand how he brings up Laos without the contradiction that it was ultimately Vietnam that invaded Laos occupied them and overthrow their Maoist government something the u.s. failed at and then were themselves invaded by china
Libertarians are always hypocritical fools
"You cannot even fathom my principles because they don't fit on a blockchain" is one of Vaush's finest insults ever
Right. It’s absolute gold.
You got a timestamp? I don’t wanna listen to three hours of “frameworks guy”’s whiny voice and insipid whataboutism to find that Grade S Vaush Burn
@@GigasGMX 2:38:25, just got to it myself and even having seen this comment already it still hits
@@eliyugend4660 Nice.
yes. it is quite the self-own.
it's one of those classic Vaushisms like when Vaush declared that H2O is not water in Mexico, because water is "aqua" there.
I knew this dude was a libertarian the moment he had connection problems at the start. Thanks Sam Seder for teaching me the way.
Everytime
ALWAYS. Without fail.
Same. I love when Sam says I could tell you were a Libertarian by your phone.
Ahhhhahahahahaha
LOL.
Guy really gives off "I could debate Hitler out of doing the Holocaust" energy lmao
I think at some point in this or a previous debate, he said that.
"Adolf, we're both intelligent adults. I think if we just chose different words we'd find we have lots of common ground. I denounciate you for attacking Poland but I also don't think the jews in the Warsaw Ghetto should've attacked your SS troops, it even resulted in 2 civilian deaths"
everyone but me gotta learn ur cringe
I'm going insane listening to this guy keep trying to act as though the conflict **must** have two valid points
everyone but me gotta learn ur cringe
"I've got a clear hour." -Vaush, having no idea what he's getting into.
I chuckled at the video name as he said that
This isn’t a debate; this is Vaush trying to explain utilitarianism to a goldfish for three hours. And I’m totally here for it
It's literally the "Manray explaining that he's holding Patrick's wallet" scene but irl
Every time this guy complained that Vaush's "I think good things are good" was simplistic, I wanted to yell at him "yeah! he's dumbing it down so you can understand it!"
@@canadianragin i was also kinda getting abliest vibes from him tbh
"goldfish" is quite accurate.
But what about Laos?!?!??
"I want to talk about this from a libertarian perspective." Oh, god.
RED ALERT RED ALERT, DANGER. DANGER.
Surprised love is love or age is just a number didn't come up
@@Black_Caucus hitler particles detected
The single funniest thing someone can say
Now I'm not saying all libertarians are idiots... but I'm yet to meet one who wasn't.
I love how this guy is so buried in his lack of a moral framework that he literally CANNOT COMPREHEND that Vaush actually has one. It's not that he disagrees with Vaush's morals, but he cannot fathom having them in the first place.
He has them some times and some times he doesn't.
He doesn't lack morals, just a frame work of it.
All his morals are very woo.
He claims to have principles, but he is constantly violating is political principles.
Mostly because political principles are dumb and incoherent.
Vaush in the other hand has ideological principles.
Like the last thing he says is "Ethics can't be applied to what countries do".
But he is very happy to apply ethics to nazi Germany.
He's a stupid hippie.
Is it like with noncompete?
This guy floundering while trying to understand the nuance in the various scenarios he brought up was extremely frustrating. I've had conversations with people who have a similar inability understanding certain concepts at work and it goes along a similar track.
@@Iloveguitar07 Similar, but this guy is still somehow better faith, if a bit dumber.
@Memefied_Diety11 Go. Outside.
"Me, the Pope, and other people on the left." I'm sorry, the _fuck!?_
it's to put himself on the side of who he's attacking.
TIL the pope is a leftist.
@@tristansheese4149 ...the pope isnt on the left... but thanks for your surface deep and largely useless observation.
Well... he's in favor of Vatican II, which is the most left you can get in the Catholic Church.
@@William-Morey-Baker You totally missed his point. He wasn't saying the pope was a leftist, what he was doing was demonstrating the dishonest tactic the libertarian was using. He was attacking leftists, while claiming to be one.
Him bringing up Starship Troopers when Vaush said something as uncontroversial as "Violence is the root of all political power" was such a soy moment from him
Soy? More like chad
@@johngreylove1359 maybe if he wasn’t a libertarian, they are basically incapable of any chadlike behavior. It’s written into their blood.
Babies first steps into modern political theory. And he can't even manage to wade through the simple stuff
how is violence the root of soft power?
@@the-gadfly4743 the only way to have soft power is to have hard power first, so it is derivative of hard power. A state's ability to project culture and ideology is directly related to it's ability to kill people. Without violence, there is no soft power.
"violence is bad so you got to let everyone do whatever they want." - This guy
He is the teacher that steps in when you fight against the bully.
I just can't ignore the basic principle of war or any conflict in general. It always the defender, who chooses the war. Aggressor in ideal wants to achieve his goals peacefully and without bloodshed. It is upon defending side to decide to give the fight. Clausewitz wrote about it in his book On War in 1800s. Using the argument of 'wasting' human lives, you are playing in hand of aggressor. If Ukraine is willing to fight, we must support them to ease their burden.
@@longarmistice It's not true. If you remember Nazi Germany, they never wanted this "without bloodshed" stuff, they wanted to kill, they wanted to kill Jews, to kill LGBTQ+ people, to kill communists, to kill Jehova Witnessess... If they were let to invade, it would NOT be "without bloodshed", it would be THE bloodshed. Putin regime may not YET be as horrifying, but being LGBT is already outlawed and judged akin to terrorism, people are murdered (Nemtsov, Politkovskaya, Navalny...), people are put in prisons for 25 years because of what they said, murderers are let loose on the streets to murder again after they participated in the war for a bit... There IS bloodshed in this regime right now, and it will become the rule whenever it reaches. So, no, not "without bloodshed" here actually. I guess a claim could be made that "you could just give them your Jews, your gays, etcetera, and save your own lives", but that's complete destruction of a nation, betrayal of your own people for personal benefit.
"I am far from defending any atrocities. And now watch me defend one atrocity by citing other atrocity...!" - for this guy, two wrongs suddenly make right, it seems.
Buddy is utterly Dunning Kruger pilled. Never seen someone with this amount of unearned confidence, and even then, i think after 2 hours+ of not being able to actually defend their position or even answer basic questions *most* people like this would have the self-awareness to *stop*
They probably thought that if they're 2 hours into the debate they must be putting up a scrappy fight. Their brain seems to operate off nothing but vibes
@@karrawr9538 100% Vibes. It's insane.
Lolbertarians aren’t really known for intellectual rigor.
Probably had to be dragged away from the mirror he was talking at to make the call.
Lack of self awareness is a defining characteristic of both tankies and libertarians.
This dudes appeal the non-violence in the face of oppression is a perfect example of “pacifism as pathology”.
As a Linux user and FOSS dev, it was frankly embarrassing to hear this guy talk about how open source was going to disrupt our way to a better future.
Open source will show the state who's boss
Like I like open source stuff, but like, these guys act like it’s the fucking second coming of Jesus
@@thevoid3010 It's like cryptobros, but without the inherent scamminess of alternative currency.
Better to learn microsoft stack than linux at this point.
Yea open source is great but it doesn't create a system that comes close to threatening internet giants, how can you be so naive?
This guy is the epitome of 'beating around the bush' energy.
Pretty sure the only Bush this guy beats is his own.
Even his peen doesn't get that much action
Hed probably say beating the bush is bad because hitler did holocaust or something
Didn't over 5 million Ukrainians flee the conflict areas which contributed to the lower civilian dsath rates? Russia has been raising cities to the ground that had civilians remained in them, the civilian death toll would be MUCH higher.
Also the Poles took in a lot of Ukrainians. Badasses.
That's right. Most "liberated" and frontline cities have 25 to 10% of their prewar population left.
Not to be too pedantic, but the word you want is ' razed' instead of 'raised.' Even though the pronunciation is almost the same. Which is why it's such an easy mistake to make.
Edit: and autocorrect is such trash.
Dude Mariupol alone has to be around 100,000k+ Deads the only way to findout the real number is when the war is over and areas like Mariupol are liberated.
What makes it more badass is that Duda's government were reluctant to take in that much refugees, but popular opinion basically forced them to.
I already commented this in YT chat during the debate: His argument that "Russia will raise citys to the ground like they did in chechnya" is missinformation.
If the russian army wants to remove citys that are far away from the front line they need aircraft. Missiles can not do it, they are too expensive and they don't carry enough payload. The only other option is atillery but atillery has very short range meaning the russian army has to actualy be within smelling distance of the city. In Chechnya the russians had air supiriority. Thats why they were able to level citys. In Ukraine they do not have air supiriority. Ukraine has extremely strong air defense. They have thousands of S-300 missiles and a mobile and well coordinated network of radar systems which they inhereted from the soviet union. If the russian air force wanted to defeat those air defenses they would need to fly SEAD and DEAD missions which they are incapable of doing.
So in conclusion: The only way the russians can level citys is by getting their army withing atillery range. And the only way we can prevent that is by sending Ukraine enough weapons and supplys to prevent the russians from advancing and to kick them back out.
1:30:20 really gets to the heart of all this. This is the emptiest debate in the world, the dude just wants to hear himself pontificate and play devil's advocate for the worst individuals imaginable. As if there's so much nuance to the discussion of whether actual death camp-operating nazis had to be dealt with instead of just lobbing "let's all get along" platitudes at them.
Russian military doesn't want to kill civilians, you say?
Damn, Russian targeting equipment must really be bad seeing how they kept directly hitting populated residential blocks and shit.
Not to mention that we have records of at least one big massacre on Ukrainian civilians...it's not like they don't want to do it, they are just so bad in their strategy that they haven't really gotten around to it as much as they would usually. And some of their victims have just labelled soldiers after they died.
Well, not meant to defend them, but it is (their targeting is really bad).
One of the reasons they target buildings and locations is because they are on any available map, and they don't move. They were there 5 years ago when the satellite image was taken, and the Russian's are pretty sure the building didn't move.
They can't target things like the HIMARS because they **have almost no deep recon ability** so they literally don't know where they are.
@Roon3808 funny how you forgot to mentioned that the Ukraine has been using civilian as meatshield. This includes them using civilian infrastructure as military bases hospitals, schools, etc. And than blame Russia for targeting them. .
@Roon3808 funny how you forgot to mentioned that the Ukraine has been using civilian as meatshield. This includes them using civilian infrastructure as military bases hospitals, schools, etc. And than blame Russia for targeting them. .
@Roon3808 funny how you forgot to mentioned that the Ukraine has been using civilian as meatshield. This includes them using civilian infrastructure as military bases hospitals, schools, etc. And than blame Russia for targeting them. .
its incredible that i can hear this guy talk for 3 hours and come away with still not knowing what the fuck he was even trying to say
Oh I know...he was trying to cast Russia in a better light without admitting that this is what he was doing.
@@swanprideand when you can't be forward about your goal then all you'll do is lie and trick people and idk how people fall for the shit and arent like skeptical like fuck
It helps when he doesnt say anything
The entire conversation is pretty much just the Putin simp not understanding situational ethics.
As a general rule it is bad to kill people (because people die when they are killed). However, if someone is attacking you and you have no idea whether or not they are attacking to kill you, with you having very few options available to you, it is better in that situation that you defend yourself by any means necessary, up to and including killing them. In other words, even though there is a general rule of "it is bad to kill people", we can add in caveats, where we can make a rule to permit such actions (i.e. "...but it can be good to kill people under these circumstances.") without actually making it an outright contradiction.
But, for some reason, the Putin simp boils it down to something akin to "Me don't understand...you say that it's bad to kill people...but then you say that it's good to kill people?!😵💫"
If someone's coming at you with a knife, consider all the frameworks that could have prevented this.
@@aurtosebaelheim5942 ?
@@littlemoth4956 he's making fun of The Libertarian.
@@aurtosebaelheim5942 ...? I seriously don't know if that was aimed at my comment or if you meant to respond to someone else.
@@Elysium_the_Bard He was agreeing with you in the memiest of internet ways. Take the W and advance.
It's strange how often this guy brought up Mao and Stalin expecting Vaush to support them when he has literally never supported either leader and in fact has repeatedly and publicly talked about their failures.
“I wanted to call in to have a calm, rational conversation… about the libertarian perspective”
😂😂😂
1:54:20 "If Putin had applied to NATO when he first wanted to in 2001, and NATO would have accepted him, boom the whole thing is solved right?"
Wrong.
Every time Putin tells this story he leaves out important details.
NATO is more than a team with a flag, it is a machine with its own systems and structure, and to become part of it you have to go through a process.
Putin wanted for Russia to become a member without any of that, just "ok, you're a member now" which is not how NATO works.
the fact people are actually that stupid... hurts.... like, it really does...
okay... that's it, 1 hour in and im done...
Vaush has the patience of a saint... super glad he wouldnt allow that weasle to get past claiming Ukraine wasnt a democracy ...
@@William-Morey-Baker done the whole 3 hours, and I can promise you we both got the same experience but you got it 2 hours quicker, the guy vaush is taking to is a black hole of conversation
I don't think this person is stupid. They're a dishonest piece of shit
@@William-Morey-Baker Funny how people claim Vaush is an angry debate bro and yet here we are.
@@William-Morey-Baker Damn, 1 hour? I couldn't even get past 30 minutes.
After 20 minutes of listening to this guy I'm already checked out.
No wonder Vaush HAS to play some shit while listening to these people.
What game is he playing? It looks fun
I'm in the ER with a brain aneurysm after listening to this guy talk to Vaush for 3 hours.
The lengths people will go to to get out of a conversation with a libertarian. Little did you know you were bare seconds away from escaping without having to make that sacrifice.
i think i would take an ER visit over listening to this man speak for 3 hours.... god damn, honestly, it hurts....
I’m in the ER rn because Vaush stabbed me and gave me leukemia
This guy sounds like Mr girl. "I would just diplomacy harder and all war would end"
Def hitting that point where it's hard to tell whether he's genuinely delusional enough to think that you can speech skillcheck every problem IRL, or if he's just trying to spread dumb, unworkable methodologies as an information warfare/sabotage tactic.
@@BackwardsPancake He's a libertarian who thinks you can have decentralized law enforcement without a government that isn't just feudalism with corporations. He's genuinely delusional as are all An-Cap-type libertarians.
Thank you I was wondering who he sounded like.
@@BackwardsPancake , boom, there it is! That's my basic question about tankies and other Russia simps. I often cannot tell who's just delusional and dumb and who's knowingly sowing misinformation and confusion for some greater aim.
@@dinosaysrawr The sad part is that unless you have very thorough background information on the speaker, it is kind of impossible to tell. The concept of "useful idiots" is not new by any means, and propagandists of all sorts will try to use that as cover.
It's not really limited to matters explicitly related to the war either, since Russia has a long track record of helping to manufacture internal conflict among their enemies just for it's own sake - Like how they ran both pro-BLM and pro-police social media groups during the Floyd protests, or how they ran anti-vax groups during the pandemic, or how they have been funding weird isolationist parties in Europe since forever.
I guess the best we can really do is remember the basics: That even true information can be presented in ways which are manipulative, and that we should analyze not only what we were told, but by whom, and what they were hoping to accomplish by telling us. And, if there is sufficient doubt (and especially if the statement comes off as engineered to provoke some sort of visceral emotional reaction), then to take the statements with a grain (or mountain) of salt.
The marriage analogy is fucking awful. An actual analogy would be as if the husband had a large amount of control and constantly overstepped boundaries and the wife decided to divorce resulting in the husband breaking into her home and beating the hell out of her.
But the wife didn't cook him food and tried to divorce him so who's really in the wrong. Blame game players I stg 🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️
And vaush began saying that and the moment he did frameworks completely changed it. Frameworks makes an example, vaush corners him in his own example, frameworks changes the example, repeat for 3 hours
@@itsyagirlMaya1999 I love that you actually just call him frameworks lmao
@@Sera-F1nn haha idk his name and he said frameworks like 50 times so screw it he’s the frameworks guy to me now 🤣
@@itsyagirlMaya1999i thought that was his name reading your 😂
"All I am saying is give Putin... I mean peace... I mean give Putin a chance to give Peace a chance, right Vaushes Chat? Shouldnt Ukraine give Putin's peace a chance? Vaush, your chat agrees with me..."
Willfull ignorance is fun for only so long. This debate hurt!
Libertarians do not believe things are objectively good or bad, while simultaneously being EXTREMELY OPINIONATED ABOUT EVERYTHING
Best explanation 😂
This guy have mastered the fractal gish gallop, just infinite side tangents every time a topic is picked
Like whatifalthist
The old faithful "if I'm stupid fast enough I'll never loose an argument"
Old crack pipe arguments
I had flashbacks to Michael Tracy when he said that his goal for these conversations was "for both of them to reach a mutual understanding of each other's positions." I'm pretty sure Michael Tracey said something very similar.
This guy's plan for insurance reducing violence is that a court (not insurance) fines the perpetrator into poverty, which he states mere minutes after correctly observing that increasing material well being reduces violence. Does he have any semblance of internal consistency?
He ended with "Ethics can't be applied to what countries do" after condemning nazi Germany.
@@MegaBanne He didn't just end with it, his whole "my family was killed by Nazis" appeal to emotion was an attempt to moralize the actions.
@@LDIndustries
Yeah, so inconsistent that it hurts my brain.
Voosh: How would insurance prevent violence?
Guy: Reads entire transcript of Bee Movie
His confusion after your "Listen up private" tangent had me in fuckin tears. Thank you Voosh.
Like literally as well vaush was explaining what he would do with the concentration camp. I was like everything that vaush saying is correct because that actually happened lol. When the third armor division liberated Bergen belson, it's estimated that they executed upwards of 50 SS guards. Hearing a literal jewish person said that he wouldn't have done. That is the most brain dead thing I've ever heard in my life.
Time stamp please.
@@vgmaster9 I'll be honest dude I can't be asked to suffer the brain death of watching it again. It was infuriating enough the first go round, sitting in my room yelling at a recording to get to the point.
@@sniperboom1202 Well I was asking OP.
@@vgmaster9 if he does he's a braver man than I to go back into that. 🫡
The guest spends far too long trying to set up his arguments, only for the arguments to turn out to be built upon wrong information and faulty assumptions.
1. NATO doesn't pose an offensive threat to Russia (except in the trivial sense that all independent countries pose potential threats to all other independent countries).
2. If Russia mistakenly believes that NATO poses an offensive threat to Russia, then NATO is not obligated to strip naked and bend over to disprove that belief.
3. It doesn't matter whether or not Russians believe that Ukraine ought to be joined with Russia; what matters is whether or not Ukrainians believe that Ukraine ought to be joined with Russia.
4. People don't have to choose between declaring all revolutions to be good or all revolutions to be bad. They're allowed to vary their opinion based on the purposes and manner of the revolution.
5. Whether the 2014 Maidan revolution was rightful or not, whether the 2014 Maidan revolution was lawful or not, has nothing to do with whether or not Ukraine was a legitimate country in February 2022.
6. If people in Donbass were unable to vote in a Ukrainian election because armed insurgents made the security situation too perilous for Ukrainian election officials to go to Donbass, then that is the fault of the insurgents, not the Ukrainian government.
7. There is no evidence that the Ukrainian military targeted civilians while fighting the Russian-backed separatists in Donbass 2014-2022. There is plenty of evidence that the Ukrainian military targeted armed insurgents in Donbass during that time. The number of civilian victims of the conflict reported during that time was normal for a conflict where both sides were employing artillery against each other in populated areas; it is indicative of collateral damage, not attempted genocide.
He probably implied a lot more faulty statements than those, but I lost track of them while reading between the lines for 3 hours.
This libertarian: I don't want us to get too wrapped up in the broad details of countries, I want to focus on the wellbeing of people, like a true libertarian would.
Also This Libertarian: We cannot help people until our country has a literally perfect foreign policy record.
...and Ukraine doesn't have a right to exist as an independent nation until it has a perfect record, and it deserves to be absorbed/conquered by a neighboring country with a *terrible* record!
The main issue I have with this debater is that he is too idealistic. It feels as though he ignores or doesn't understand that people are irrational.
I remember this stream. My brain literally melted and leaked from my ears listening to this dudes brain literally twist itself into a Möbius strip of mental gymnastics. Like who is he kidding? 100% this guy has Noam Chomsky NFTs
@Cultured Anime Waifu 3.0 Russia will lose the war ✌🇺🇦
@Cultured Anime Waifu 3.0 the Russians lost Kherson, Izium, Kupiansk, Lyman and dozens of smaller towns in the time it took the Russians to capture soledar. It's might make a difference in bakhmut at the most, but it's as war defining a capture as pisky was. ✌️🇺🇦
Noam Chomsky NFTs? I'm getting one. To the Moon.
@culturedanimewaifu3.0 sTrAteGic, look at a map. lol
@culturedanimewaifu3.0 imagine arm chairing military tactics
1:18:55 "I'm a libertarian, I've specifically said I opposed violence" Yeah that sounds a lot more like the right wing definition of libertarian where they claim to care for nothing but the NAP but in reality just don't want violence done on them.
@Bob Smith When that includes opposing self defense against fascists, yeah. Was also true of "America First" advocates against fighting the Nazis in 1939. Advocating for surrendering to fascists in the name of "pacifism" is right wing.
@Bob Smith Hello Bob Smith, I'm glad to see that your frontal lobe lobotomy didn't claim your life. However it seems to have left you with an inability to comprehend the written word.
Libertarians - the universal punching bags of ideological conversation 😂
Sam Seder destroying libertarians is some legendary stuff if y'all wanna dig, some good Michael Brooks in there too 👍
RIP Michael Brooks... honestly made me cry when that man died. he was a real one.
@@William-Morey-Baker hurt me, too. Still can't believe he's gone.
My favorite one with Michael was the Libertarian suggesting assassinations.
yup! they have an entire playlist dedicated to Sam dunking on lulbertarians 😂
left is best
Every time I listen to one of these pro-Putin types I get more and more confident in my position. They just provide further support for my position
You never talked with eastEuropean. Americans are ignorant!
I'm still waiting to hear how insurance is gonna stop the war....wtf even was that? This is why we don't need tech bro's deciding policy
You know how many Russian oligarchs want the war to end because their yachts got confiscated or whatever? It's like that but on a larger scale, assuming I'm thinking of the same thing as him. A very Hamilton-esque idea that economic investment encourages stability.
Now how he plans to implement this logistically, especially since he seems anti-UN, I have no idea.
@@happycamperds9917 Keep in mind economic stability doesn't mean the rich people in Russia getting their Yachts back. Russia had money and economic investment but most of that went to the top thus creating instability. You would have to change the whole hierarchy in Russia with dramatic restructuring to pull off anything that is gonna give Russia economic stability and for that you're gonna have to get rid of old guard and Putin and the new people have to not be corrupt otherwise you're just gonna end up in the same situation. I don't know how you do that peacefully Also keep in mind that there are a lot of reasons for people to war and money isn't the only one nor is it the case with the Ukraine war. OR you know every country on the planet is a good example because every single one no matter how economically stable has been in a war over the past couple decades.
Imagine if we handled car accidents with this man's logic "now he may have been driving drunk but I don't assign blame I find it useless in solving problems"
...so the victim should have to pay for their own injuries and repairs because of personal responsibility and freedom for all.
The point where the guy started listing countries that agree with him to frame the general consensus on this conflict as Pro-Russia was only topped by the moment after where he said that he was actually trying to understand how you square being a leftist with being pro-Ukraine. I can't stop thinking about it.
This is why I don’t want to be grouped with leftists because this guy and all the tankies think they are the left. Frankly I’d rather not swim in that pond.
Also how he said Vaush was the one who conflated governments with the people. Directly after saying billions of people agreed with him just because the governments do.
Supporting Ukraine isn't leftist it is pro-US imperalism that it. The entire War is cause by the US empire and if you think otherwise than you are just a lib not a leftist. The idea that a leftist is pro-Ukraine is completely antithetical of being a leftist and Vaush isn't a leftist either but a lib and he has proven this time and time again. This guy will support the US empire at everyturn and it is staggering how many people who thinks they are being leftist while they are just a lib
@@ericmacrae6871 Ukraine is an independent nation Russia invaded after many agreements they would not. The only imperialism happening is from Russia literally trying to annex a neighbor state.
@LizFallingUp How can Ukraine be an independent state when the US did a neo-nazi coup in 2014 to install a puppet state?
How can Rusia honor his agreement when Ukraine regime has broken every single treaty with Russia and they never had any attention to do so? They have openly admitted that they never attended to honor the Minks agreements. They simply used it as a way to delay the war as much as possible while they were building their NATO troops.
Lastly, how can Russia be the invader when Ukraine was the first one who lunch an invasion of 100k men into the Donbas BEFORE the Russian invasion.
'You sound like a statist, oh and I think Russia is a democracy with free and fair elections while Ukraine overthrew their democracy' that was provided by a Putin loyalist.
Commented this on the stream, but my god the psychic damage I take the second someone says "If we could all just listen to each other" is visceral.
Its almost as bad as when I lay out why someone is wrong and then they start nodding like Im agreeing with them...oh wait that also happened here.
"I think we should eat poop and also bad thing bad"
"I mean yeah bad thing is ba-"
"See Im glad we are in agreement with what I said previously"
@Cultured Anime Waifu 3.0 And?
@Cultured Anime Waifu 3.0 thanks for boosting vaush in the algorithm
"I think we have some agreement here."
Every dishonest POS trying to save face since eternity.
@@rainbowkrampus its so frustrating. The worst is with wu peddlers and pseudoscience nuts. They start using words like quantum and fractal and just nod along when you explain the actual definitions.
@Cultured Anime Waifu 3.0
I've seen photos of the city. I don't even understand why would Russian supporters be happy about what they got. Only ruins are left. It won't be rebuilt within my lifetime considering low (negative) population growth rate(both of Ukraine as well as Russia) and its closeness to a very hostlie border. It will become a ghost town
There're villages like this in Poland. They suffered a lot during WWII and under Soviet regime. Nowadays they're just points on a map, obscure tourist attractions. This is Russia's Mir. This is what Putin is striving to achieve
1:32:21 walks into Auschwitz’s and demands the Jews file an insurance claim against the Nazi’s OMG
I get these people so mixed up, is this the guy who wanted to stop the war but wouldn't say that Russia should stop invading?
Edit: after 10 minutes I still have no idea what point he's trying to make halp
Edit 2: ohhhhh it's the blame game guy oof
aka the frameworks guy
2:25:40 it isn't that vaush literally is just "for good things and against bad things", it's that his STANDARD for determining good and bad is based on harm and how much harm an action will have. In this case, Russia succeeding will have much worse outcomes, so therefore it makes sense to not support them.
Utilitarianism is a b******* ideology.
@@manco828 why
@@jaredgreathouse3672 You need an overarching morality above pure utilitarianism.
@manco82 well wait a minute, I didn't say pure utilitarianism. It would be utilitarian, technically, if nobody drank alcohol, but the reality of the matter is that that can't happen and it's never happened. So, we set reasonable guidelines around utility maximization, subject to certain constraints (freedom consideration, the effect of one thing on a host of other factors).I never said pure utilitarianism is possible, and now that I think about it, it isn't desirable.
For some reason, I listened to this live until an ungodly hour in the UK. I've since concluded the sleep deprivation wasn't terribly worth listening to this nincompoop waste Vaush's time for 3 hours.
His looping diversions to things that had nothing to do with what they were talking about reminded me of an old Matt Dillahunty line:
"What is this, non sequitur hour?"
No it’s 3.
Never heard Dillahunty say that one but its apt. Being sleep deficient the next day is never worth it for a Vaush debate. Then again I sometimes listen to them at work which is basically means im bombarded with idiocy from every angle so what do I know.
Honestly, you have to be at your best to shrug off the lingering effects of weapons grade stupitonium or worse when he debates active "left" reactionaries, ethno-nationalists, uberfrau She-Ra Man Hater Club (TM) feminists, and red fascists. Professor Flowers. Jabson Hankle. The pencil idiot. So many others who are vile sub-humans who, if they ever got near power and achieved their goals, would find a coalition of nations invading where ever they are to depose them (assuming they don't have nukes). After some Nuremberg-style trials, they'd all be left dangling.
Then there are the useful idiots doing apologia for them like Noah Samsen and Big Joel.
Debates like these make me very glad vaush gets paid for his time one way or another 😂 holy shit this debate was painful.
It’s like 4 in the morning for me. I pushed through with you.
Thank you for being one of the few leftists in the UK, or at least that’s what I’ve seen from there, there seems to be this bizzare stigma for leftists in the UK, you have to be a centrist right or centrist liberal, nothing else.
Also I love that automatic Shakespearean insults you guys can whip out even at your sleep deprived mind rn.
>russian invasion of south and east and it’s occupation is a minuscule reason of why votes on occupied territory were not counted.
That’s a popped vein on my forehead.
Vaush at the start of the video: “I’ve got a clear hour”
*looks at the video length* 💀
Libertarians always have a way of doing that😂
I am currently huddled in the corner and crying uncontrollably because I just can't believe that Vaush would lie like that
@@artisticcannibalism1350 Vaush had no control over the time dilation this guest has brought.
@@kneau black holes do bend time like that
“You can’t apply ethics to countries” I would’ve called it here too. Jesus Christ..
I can't belive Rusian waifu yell at Vaush 💀
Wait is that russian waifu for real?
@@unclebobboomergames Seems like that bot network has been banned for a while, but this guy might as well have been one of its operators for his inability to respond or engage with any points.
I used this to get me through two hours of cardio, listening to the inability to understand ethics even at a very basic level was so infuriating that I could channel it into rage filled running energy.
The energy you got from that would have enabled you to run around the globe. Twice.
Funny how he talks about Donbas being disenfranchised when ultras from Shakhtar FC actively participated in Maidan, on a pro-Ukraine side at that.
I found that the biggest gap between understanding of 2014-2022 events in Ukraine can be resolved if people on the West would read a Wikipedia article 'Igor Girkin.'
In Ukraine and Russia, he's like a superstar political commentator right now, living on the basis of his former fame.
In the West, people didn't even know that he is the Russian secret agent that:
- forced Crimean deputees under the gun point to force referendum and to assign a pro-Russia stooge with a 5% seats in the Parliament as a Crimea emergency leader
- turned protests in Donbass into violent insurrection sheerly by his militarily involvement
- became a Surpeme Military Commander of Donbas
- gave an order to hit what turned out to be the Malaysian Boeing
And, you know, Maidan in Donetsk.
This guy would argue we could prevent sexual assault from ever happening again by everyone simply giving universal consent.
I call it Kumbayaism
The Political ideology that if we all sit around a camp fire and sing kumbaya we will have world peace.
This really do feel like a thinly veiled techbro trying to "fix" human conflict with "systems"
OH okay I should have watched further Vaus has had this guy before and techbro systemposting was literally his schtick
@@stoneofdoom "We should put in frameworks"
When the guy said he'd solve a problem by "making it open source" had such 'tell me you don't know how something works without telling me' energy.
And a time-machine apparently.
*Tankie (sorry, "Libertarian"):* "I wanted to call in and kind of have a calm, rational conversation..."
*Me:* _[scooches forward, leans towards screen, resting my head on both hands with my elbows resting on my desk, attention fully engaged]_
Huh, I know they've debated before and he sounds familiar, but I can't put my finger on it...
"When I say the blame game, I mean-"
OH FUCK
YEP I was like "Is this the frameworks guy" and lo and behold at like 38 minutes
It's the video called this debate had chat begging for death
@Josh Kiss yep!!!!!!! I totally remember now
In stellaris he would be considered a fanatical pacifist whose empire would be easily annexed and whose pops would then be turned into slaves.
I got scared this was another Micheal "debate"
Michael Michael
Michael
Miiiichael. Miiiiiiicheal. Mikel. Mikael. Miguel. Michael. Miiiiichael. Yes or no.
It's kinda like a spiritual successor to it.
Me and MICHAEL
Michael? MICHAEL!
Let me very autistically put this in Magic the Gathering terms.
This guy thinks he can be the perfect lockdown control player and create a boardstate where the combat phase doesn't happen. Ok. But Russia slipped in a Craterhoof Bahemoth and it's the combat phase. What do you do?
This guy, probably: "Well if I drew a Humility last turn, I would have played that."
Ok but you DIDN'T so how do you proceed in our current reality where that didn't happen.
This guy: "....."
"Let's talk about state-based effects for a moment because--"
AAAAAA-
Accurate
Frameworks Guy! My favorite flavor of brain damaged authoritarian.
@Cultured Anime Waifu 3.0 If you love Russia so much, why don't you go over there and take a bullet for it on the front lines?
@Cultured Anime Waifu 3.0 *Occupied
@Cultured Anime Waifu 3.0 thanks for boosting vaush in the algorithm
@Cultured Anime Waifu 3.0 Kherson was "russian" too, emphasis on was
@Cultured Anime Waifu 3.0 and yet you refuse to take up Mosin to defend it!
I find entire bullet for you, and you won't use it to fight!
Shame.
The part where he does everything in his power to not say out loud why the population of Donbas weren't allowed to vote after the Russian invasion almost did me in
I had to tap out halfway into the last debate with this guy, don't know if I'll manage to last the entire 3 hours this time
We must suffer together
At least you commented for the algorithm. We must all do our part 😆
your sacrifice will not be forgotten
At last, a fresh libertarian take on how Russia isn’t at fault for the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
When I watch debates I try to focus less on the back and forth arguing/ debunking etc and just pay attention to the fresh, proactive arguments people make when they have the floor. It's amazing how hotblooded people are, how hard they work to get onto a platform, and then they make these flaccid, unimpressive arguments like they're clocking in at a job.
I’m just trying to watch vaush gaming
“I wanted to have a calm, rational conversation” is perhaps one of the most hilarious and telling openings I’ve ever heard
He's just an abuse enabler, can we all just a agree that's were it goes when your this big of a coward.
As a European, nobody invading anybody is such a basic rule that everybody should stick to … no sovereign, independent country gets invaded. Not a difficult rule … so the invader needs to go home. How anyone can argue on the invading country behalf is beyond me…
Okay let me sum this up
Caller: I don't want anyone to get hurt
Vaush: good me too.
Caller: Shame we pushed Russia to invade Ukraine.
Vaush: We didn't, he invaded and needs to stop.
Caller: No!!!! WHY DO YOU WANT EVERYONE TO DIE!!!!!
Vaush: -_- why do I even try
It's 40 minutes in and this guy hasn't said like anything. True Libertarian.
Vaush: I have a good hour
Vaush's editors: an hour he says, only an hour...
"Did Ukraine have troops in Russia?" "They had troops in The Donbas" so Ukraine had troops in.. Ukraine?
This guy is like whatifalthis and how he's incredibly dishonest how he frames things
Me hearing "but before I do" for the 5 billionth time when Vaush asks this guy to have a point: 😣😣😣😣😣😣😣😣
The Wikipedia part at 1:05:00 is hilarious.
"it's on Wikipedia"
"you can't trust Wikipedia"
"Wikipedia is lying"
"I'll read from the article [vaush looks up article to follow along] uh I can't do this live uhhh its a big article"
"Heh, you actually think we should fight fascism" Yes. Correct.
It's been a long time since I've heard someone use this many word to say absolutely nothing.
It's honestly jaw-dropping how he keeps calling your worldview simplistic while at the same time demonstrating a complete inability to understand nuance and context.
Dude starts speaking about the conflict in Yemen, then it takes him 15seconds to show that he knows basically nothing about that conflict.
And before he completes his point, which wasn’t exactly great to begin with, he just stops as even he manages to sus out that he has no clue.
This was painful.
Bro is just straight up lying and when Voosh calls him on it he's like "Well this isn't fair, you're not giving me 60 seconds to explain." Voosh is a saint for going through at least 9 hours of agony talking to this guy over 3 debates if you can call them that.
That rant at 1:56:15 is honestly one of my favorite Vaush moments in a while.
Thanks for the torture video. I went insane because of it. I went outside, clocked a random guy on the street, dragged him to my basement, cuffed him to a pipe and made him listen. Now when he's ready there will be two of us.
😆😆😆🖖
This was such a good example of over educated and zero sense. You start out thinking wow he knows so many historical facts. Then he states facts and draws connections and conclusions and your jaw just drops at the idiocy.
I love how his proposed solution to violence was a weregild system like 9th century England had. A time period where you could legally kill a person as long as you had the money to pay the fine
Libertarians: "The Non-Aggression Principle is the foundation of Libertarianism."
This Libertarian: 21:32
Debates like this always make me feel like I've just run a marathon by the end, I never want to do it again yet somehow I always see it all the way through next time around
13:30 I'm seeing the length of this debate and I doubt this claim will turn out to be true 🤷♂️
When someone says you can't apply ethics, they have lost.
This was physically painful to listen to. Like how can one person be so wrong about EVERYTHING.
My brain hurts.
Nothing he says makes any sense.
"What should we do about Russia invading Ukraine, TODAY."
"We should invent a time machine, go back in time, and alter nothing."
Ah yes, it's our favorite "throw more peace contracts at them if they don't adhere to the first 6 or 7" cryptobro.
this discussion is made more annoying by the fact that "yes, i agree it would be preferable to solve problems without resorting to violence" is, i would assume, the predominant position of every living human on earth that isn't a total fucking psychopath.... thats great, unfortunately we don't have a time machine to allow us to unfuck every situation that escalates to violence... and this guy doesn't seem to understand that
oh god i forgot hes a tech bro please just let me die
1:07 "I've got a clear hour"
He said, not knowing he'd add another aneurysm to chat
He just blamed NATO for the splintering of Yugoslavia that’s not how that shit works.
The "only 7000 civilians dead" argument is dishonest: the stats provided are from the OHCHR citing verified deaths only, as provided by the Russian and Ukrainian governments. In other words, cities under Russian control, like Mariupol, are likely not accounted for, making the actual estimate much higher.
1:49:18
HOLY SHIT IS THAT WRONG.
I'm a former Yugoslav citizen of Croatian, Slovenian and Montenegrin descent and I felt the stupidity of that statement in my genes.
Thank you I was like WTF did he just say!
@@LizStaples This man's politics are like letters generated by AI. You can tell it's supposed to be letters, you can almost make out some words, but it's a mess that makes no sense.
"Vaush, stop anthropomorphizing countries, it's silly. Anyway, what Ukraine should have done is just waited..."