These are my issues with Socialists & Communists - Destiny Debates Douglas Lain
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 6 сен 2019
- Douglas runs the Zero Squared podcast, Zero Books RUclips channel, publishes books for Zero Books and more!
Click▼
Date streamed: 09/02/2019
Follow Destiny
►STREAM - www.destiny.gg/bigscreen
►DISCORD - discordapp.com/invite/destiny
►REDDIT - / destiny
►INSTAGRAM - / destiny
Follow Douglas Lain
►TWITTER - / zer0books
►PATREON - / zerobooks
►RUclips - / @zer0repeater
Use Destiny's affiliate link to buy stuff! www.amazon.com/?tag=des000-20
Produced by Voddity
►Voddity - / voddity
►Edited by - / editormaddog
►Thumbnail by - / indrarararara
Music:
►OUTRO: / cc6-mastered-3-conflict
What if the real debate was the friends we made along the way.
Then cenk's nephew's former-friend got destroyed in that debate
Lost*
cur hahahaha
Abraham Lincoln was a TANKIE!
@@nocuh Former? PepeHands
Destiny got a birthday card in this debate
Took a 48 year old, actually well-read boomer to provide a wealth of knowledge and have a serious, productive conversation on the tenets of Marxist political critique. Love Douglas Lain!
Generation X = born 1964 - 1981
Boomer = born 1946 - 1964
But, thanks for the compliment.
@@zer0repeater Ironically, Doug, by not getting the 'Boomer' reference as just a popular online meme and label for anyone outside of Generation Z, you have solidified yourself as a member of this category. Boomer is a mindset and a way of life.
@@JB-vq3yl Damn your memes. What about my ZIma?
@@JB-vq3yl I refuse to let my generation be erased from history by a bunch of teenagers who have no idea why it is that a Subaru is like punk rock. ruclips.net/video/vLhfxI8T2cU/видео.html
I think this guy was very intelligent and respectful, he also understands socialism and communism more fundamentally than Caleb. +1
Are you telling me I shouldn't be convinced by YOU DONT EVEN GIVE A SHIT ABOUT LIFE EXPECTANCY REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
Except he’s a class reductionist
@@newworld3844 so class reductionist don't have to make rational arguments? What does that have to do with Caleb being a SHIT ASS idealog with a SHIT ASS book I wouldn't bother wiping my ass with.
@@andersanders47 that makes his stupidity even worse if that's really the case. DUHHH 1 DATA POINT, YOU CAN'T EVEN EXTRAPOLATE MY ENTIRE DUMB ASS BELIEF? BUY MY BOOK DEN
Douglas Lain is in a different league.
Hello, zero books readers!
Thought Ray I just got my copy of “give them an argument”
its me again, Douglas Lain
I feel attacked.
@@Xx1PWNY1xX Sorry, Zero Books isn't that kind of leftists.
@@TheSugarRay I thought you were saying "Hello, people who dont read books!"
I love how his kid walks in the room and is pumped he’s debating the guy who exposed jontron.
Fuck JonTron but isnt being " exposed " supposed to affect someone in a negative way? Last I checked JonTron is doing pretty good views wise and all that.
American Insurgent look up the definition of exposed. I think your thinking of being canceled
American Insurgent nope. Countless dickheads get exposed and they continue doing their thing. Sometimes their fans don't care that they've been exposed as bigots or idiots or whatever.
@@OscarMaris perfect example is keemstar... been exposed for just being an all around garbage human being like 10,000 times and no one cares
@@americaninsurgent4403 being "exposed" exposed is a reason for lefty kids to express all their hate towards this person they have accumulated. For someone who have been enjoying Jontrons content and occasionally kept up with whats new with him. It generally felt like Jontron had gotten in to some pits of shitty information.
Because god damn I can assure you if you are even a bit naive person to the political scene, and you happen to fall in to right wing or leftwing information circles, these circles will prey on your luck of knowledge, fears and anger, to convince you about their point of view. It is hard to say if Jontron did change any of his opinions after chat with Destiny. But at least I haven't seen him spearing that information, so in the end most people might be alright with that situation.
Because I guarantee if you talk to most people long enough you'll extract some bits of bad ideas, and the younger they are the worst these and more violent these ideas are.
The majority of slaves in ancient rome were of mediterranean and european descent while there were black soldiers who were not enslaved and often lived in families of "white" people. Their inherited physical characteristics were not related to slave status.
Also, about African slaves. Historians argue that racism towards black people was borne out of their enslavement and not the other way around.
Kono In conclusion:*
@@jayt7178 You're laughable.
The Ancient Greeks, as well as the Romans in the creation of the Roman Kingdom (753), were always racially conscious of what was incorporated as a Greek or Roman. The previous statement the guy made implicated that format that Sub-sarahan Africans were ubiquitous any form of Roman governance or daily life (or if they had a say: which is not the case at all) or that they weren't seen as perturbing: when even in Roman and Greek society being of bronze skin was considered the best virtue. You're part of the Vaush crowd that believes Romans believed in idealistic principles only and ethnicity in and of itself had no subsistence: the Social War of 91 - 88 BC goes against this very claim. Even when Rome was expanding itself during Kingdom times, they were scrupulous on what was considered Roman or not.
You made a posit siting four individuals in Britain simulating that of African genes (what does this do exactly?). You just beg the question who exactly they were and if they had the format in the governance of that area: nor does it help the original claim that was posited by the mongoloid beforehand.
Rome was the most ethnically diverse capital? How does that help you in your claim about Africans in Rome? I don't understand this logic.
Even the Wikipedia article that you sited (which is laughable) states this:
"There was no such thing as a black community; immigrants from south of the Sahara were few and from disparate ethnic communities." It seems safe to assume that the Romans didn't consider them threats like that of the Barbarians. But this is predicated on value-judgements and what-ifs.
(If you read about the Fayum Portraits and Greeks who situated themselves there, the Romans refused, under Pompei, to recognise them as Greeks, because they mixed with the Egyptians and that the facilitation to bestow upon them the rights that Greeks received at that time were then denied.)
North Africans have no similarities with that of Sub-saharans which the previous comment was elucidating too. Even in our contemporary society, the North Africans of today are almost discontinuations to that of the ones of Antiquity.
Secondly, you sourced a fucking BBC article: which is laughable when it comes to the fucking discussion. Even in your fucking quote, they display "kinship and places of origin," which goes against the very thing you posit (the Romans valued Phenotypes, any argument is ludicrous against it: the statues are an example of what the Romans exemplified in their society). I can't believe how debauched you are of history. Any implication that the Romans thought that of Subsaharan Africans to be that of the same of the Mediterranean Rome that they valued is crazy. The Romans were even hostile towards that of Barbarians that congealed to the army apparatus and even hated it when they were given generals who had germanic ancestry. Honestly, read Plutarch, Cicero, even Aristotle to that of the Greeks. You have no idea what you're talking about and I pity that you have to facilitate your world view to that Mediterraneans or justify that blacks had any say of the world at that time. I'm not implicating any hatred towards them, but for that guy to say that is ridiculous.
You're a historical degenerate and you have no idea what you're talking about. Dunning-Kruger effect in full display.
@@konoofethos8871 Tbh, I'm not sure why I'm explaining any of this since you specifically got butthurt about Africans and are clearly probably a reactionary that's upset that history is complex and can't be understood racially like you want it to be, but your argument is self-defeating. The Social War was a war between various Italic peoples, all of whom had no real racial differences. Not only that but it's pretty basic knowledge that the elites of every individual Roman Province were the elite of that province when it was conquered or incorporated. That was the basic principle of Roman expansion. Assimilate the people at the top that held real power and the region would fall under your control. Being Roman was a political status not an economic one. The only reason most Italians were even citizens was because they were granted citizenship to quell unrest after the Social War. Not to mention, the other people of the Italian peninsula at the time weren't part of the Republic. Their official status was Allies, all be it in name only. And they were called Latins which was a separate political status that lied between freedmen and citizen in terms of privileges. Also about bronze skin being "the best virtue." The existence of cultural beauty standards, or certain physical traits being desirable, isn't in any way shape or form identical to institutionalized racism and this goes for your statue argument too. There's no widespread reason to believe that Romans hated any particular *race* more than the other, nor did they feel kinship with other individuals supposedly of the same race. Obviously since they didn't consider Greeks equal cultural equals. They looked down upon people that weren't part of their culture. And even if Sub saharan Africans didn't play a large role in Roman history almost certainly as legionnaires and as powerful nobles. Egyptians, Berbers, Syrians, Anatolians, and also various other Europeans, like Gauls or Britons. Many of these groups were non-white and many were not. Romans sought cultural assimilation, and at the end of the empire most of Emperors were of wealthy and well established families that came from outside Rome or the Italian peninsula. Like Trajan, who was from Hispania. Or Septimius Severus who was from North Africa. Or the Barrack Emperors from Illyria. The Romans weren't racially conscious, they were culturally or tribally conscious. The most important aspect of your origin was extended family or otherwise tribe. That's why Emperors from particular dynasties often had strange connections to each other. Like Augustus being Caesar's nephew, or like a number of Augustus' successors not being direct descendants of him. For example Claudius. The wealthiest tribes in the Republic and later empire were the most prominent. Anyway I could keep going, but this is basically a lecture at this point and I'd have to start citing sources and going into extreme detail, but if you reached the end, stop being butthurt about black people in the Roman Empire or whatever. Lets be real, statistically there was a probably a few here or there specifically because you know, Nubians lived inside the Empire. Maybe they weren't a big deal, they probably weren't that common, but anyway I just wanted to discuss this strange notion that Romans had this concept of race that's comparable to our modern concept of it.
@@nathanielmalekani1529 Everything you said has nothing to do with the claim of what the guy said about Africans as soldiers: all you did was solidify and exposit what I said further. Regarding the Social War, you saying that the Italic peoples in the Italian Peninsula as were ethnically homogeneous shows you have no idea what you're talking about: genetically speaking. The Social War wasn't only cultural. Nothing of what you said affects my claims; if anything, it supports it even more. All the individuals you mentioned as historically significant figures were MEDETTERANIAN; that was my whole posit. TRIBAL CONSCIOUSNESS IS NOT ONLY BASED UPON CULTURE; there are PHENOTPYICAL TRAITS CONNECTED TO THAT TRIBE; that identity. What the fuck is this? I never stated it was comparable to our modern concept. I STATED THAT IT EXISTED: that is all. Even more, the Romans didn't consider the Greek culture to be inferior (what the fuck?) They even considered you high class if you spoke AncientGreek. I swear, what do you guys read for information?
@Kono Idk dude all you've done is turn down every source people have given on the subject as "not reliable" while not giving any reasons for why as well as not providing any sources of your own to prove your points. If what you're saying seems to disagree with most of the most commonly cited experts on the subject, (and possibly the only ones) then I think there is a good reason to see your points here as pretty conspiracy theory-ish in nature unless you can provide substantial backing by historians to show you are correct.
My god it's a debate where destiny's opponent isn't stupider than a brick and doesn't understand basic rhetoric. This was really enjoyable to listen to.
Meh dude tried to argue we should care about per capita stats
That’s mind numbingly stupid
This is why Gen Ed in college is so important. You learn to dicipher and evaluate info.
So, it's interesting - Destiny said one thing that's frustrating about socialists/communists, and the left in general for him, is the lack of unity due to bickering and nitpicking between various left-wing ideologies, and that the lack of unity in favour of in-fighting and purity testing is a disadvantage at fighting the right because there is less of this on the right. But he also said an issue he has with socialists and communists is that not only are there a lot of tankies and Stalinists, but that the other people who are non-tankies and non-stalinists don't do enough to push back against them or call them out, and will provide cover and in some cases support for those parts in their movement, and even goes as far as to suggest that many people on the left who identify as social democrats, democratic socialists, anarchists, left communists, etc. are actually closeted tankies and Stalinists who are just hiding their power level.
So, which one is it? Is the lack of unity amongst the left a problem? Or is the unity between stalinists and non-stalinists a problem? Or am I missing something that just wasn't explained or delved into? Does he think that the lack of unity between say, socialists and non-socialist leftists is a problem, and thinks THAT is the unity that needs to be taking place in place of the "unity" between, say, anarchists and Marxist-Leninists? Does he think that non-stalinist socialists are more likely to ally with stalinists than they are with Soc Dems or "regular" liberals, and he thinks that's a problem? If that's the case, then fine, but I feel like that needs to be articulated much better. Otherwise, the two issues stated above that he said he has are contradictory and don't go hand in hand with each other.
With regards to the issue of racism in society being a result of structural and class divide vs. being a result of inherent tribalism, I think there was a bit of talking past each other here between Destiny and DL. To be charitable, I think when DL says that racism is a result of capitalism and class divide and is thus more structural, he's saying that's where the starting point was, and over time it has become so ingrained in society that now it has become more internal and on an individual basis because of how we are brought up and our environment where those racial divisions already exist due to class. He goes into this a bit with regards to things like red-lining kind of laying the foundations for why cops and judges have racial biases. But it goes back further than that with white capitalists using racism as a tool to drive poor white and poor black people apart to prevent them from fraternizing and socializing and thus forming better, smoother coalitions against the upper class.
Destiny will say that simply transitioning a predominantly white society from capitalist to socialist - he uses Tennessee and Louisiana as examples - that you will not magically get rid of racism that a lot of people in those states hold on to. He's correct, you'll still have to work to eliminate the racist attitudes amongst the population, but the reason you have racism amongst those people because that's a result of the environment around them and their upbringing, not because of their inherent tribalism. Tennessee and Louisiana are already deep red, probably racist states. By contrast, other predominanly white areas, such as New England or the Atlantic provinces in Canada, wouldn't have that same issue if you transitioned to a socialist system because the level of prejudice against black people isn't there despite black people making up a very small part of those areas.
I probably didn't articulate that all that well and typed too much, but that's how I viewed what people say when they say that class divide is the predominant motivating factor of racial tension in our history, specifically American history.
This might be one of the dumbest fucking comments I've ever read in my entire life, holy fucking shit.
"Destiny says that there isn't unity among a group of diverse people, but then he goes on to say that that group of people should push back against the most toxic/insane aspects of their group. Well which is it, Destiny?!"
@@destiny Ouch, tell me how you really feel dude.
I very clearly said later on in the comment:
"Or am I missing something that just wasn't explained or delved into? Does he think that the lack of unity between say, socialists and non-socialist leftists is a problem, and thinks THAT is the unity that needs to be taking place in place of the "unity" between, say, anarchists and Marxist-Leninists? Does he think that non-stalinist socialists are more likely to ally with stalinists than they are with Soc Dems or "regular" liberals, and he thinks that's a problem?"
Judging by your reply to me, you obviously feel that way - you think there should be more unity overall amongst certain factions of the left where there currently isn't any (e.g. between anarchists and soc-dems), but that the toxic elements (e.g. tankies) should be disasscoiated with and pushed back against. My point was that this wasn't articulated well enough when you say "there is too much infighting" at one point and say "there are too many of these types who aren't pushed back against enough" at another point. Those two statements (which is essentially the way you made them in this conversation) are diametrically opposed, because the same "lack of unity" amongst the left would exist if Anarchists were trying to get rid of Marxist-Leninists rather than getting rid of liberals and soc-dems.
@@destiny It's really not.
It's super measured and well thought out and you're just being a small brained whiner baby. Put your big boy britches on and stop intentionally de-contextualizing people when you criticize them.
@@destiny god damn that's a yikesy reply. He even left room in his comment for you to correct, and instead you just act shitty. Come on dude.
@@blitz8425 Holy shit that response. I would say this is Shockingly horrid, shitty and immature behavior even from Destiny, but after witnessing his, interestingly enough, hostile inability to digest new information that directly counters his views due to his insecurity and huge ego (a dangerous combination), and an extremely heavy reliance on logical fallacies in debates, I put absolutely nothing past him.
The reason why this old man says modern slavery is rooted in capitalism and not in racism (whether he knows it or not) is because racism isn't part of the reason for slavery, but a product of it. Slavery before was a form of domination between one nation to the other, regardless of race. The commonality between enslaved races in modern times isn't just their non-whiteness, but their lack of development in military and social structures, which is why countries like Ethiopia and Thailand were never colonized, but all the countries surrounding Russia were technically colonized by the russian empire, if we consider colonization as the occupation of the land, the exploitation of resources, the attempt at erasure and assimilation of culture and the discrimination of the people as sub-class citizens. The reason for colonization was capitalist, even if said countries still operated under the guise of kingdoms or empires and held some form of feudal social structure. And then racism happened as a byproduct of slavery, even amongst white countries where the procedence was sometimes used to try and determine different race (like the aforementioned russian empire, or the british empire within the british isles), and it was continued for capitalist reasons (slavery becoming a powerful mean of production and then becoming illegal meant that those lands where it was used turned quickly into racism as a way to produce cheap labor and exculpate it). So yeah, while there's always been slaves, the reason for their existence is largely capitalist in nature (with some cultural exceptions), and racism came after the fact, even if natural bias against the different is part of the basic psychological structure of animals in general.
MageOLight how can slavery be capitalist when capitalism is defined as the free exchange of goods and services. Slavery was often enacted by governments. Tribes going to war and enslaving the populace. Furthermore the concept of human rights is deeply rooted in capitalism in that humans cannot be property like bricks and food. Plus, isn’t forced labor in concentration camps a form of slavery too? Also, whites and blacks weren’t the only ones with slaves. Arabs enslaved Africans, Africans enslaved neighboring tribes, every society had slavery and all were at one point enforced by the government.
Slavery serves capitalists and so does the government. Anytime you have capitalism the government will serve those elites.
guyoflife as if having socialism won’t serve the government elites.
Pls Know the difference between Capitalism,feudalism, mercantilism. i cant take you seriously if you think ancient empires ran on the basis of "capitalism". This is why no one can take Communist seriously you guys don't even know the words you are talking about
@@achinthmurali5207
"how can slavery be capitalist when capitalism is defined as the free exchange of goods and services. "
The definition of SLAVE, is a human being sold on a market, aka free exchange as a property. If it's a tribe, government, company etc do not matter, and it do not matter how much we want to talk about slavery to be something else.
In this episode of Destiny Ball Z, Destiny has battled the elite warriors from planet Tankie for the past several months. Each Tankie with a unique fighting style developed through rigorous internet battles. Will Destiny's training in the hyperbolic chat room pay off and score him an easy victory, or will he get published in this debate.
Ultra Gman7429 ruclips.net/video/pVYeJyZCwzE/видео.html
FiRez lol
Need to make an anime. Think of all the arcs we could have: Radical conservative arc, Immigrant arc, socialist arc.
A baki manga fan. I appreciate you
@SSJ Shapiro Nah dude, Destiny is Goku and Hasan is Piccolo, Mr. Mouton is Krillin and Rem is Vegeta. lol
"Government is evil" is a specifically American right-wing belief. In Europe there is pretty much no right-wing party that is not for big government. And there are very few libertarians.
I'm from holland. Here this is only partly true here. The anti government shit is not as extreme but there is definitely a push away from big government. Here we have the VVD, a rightwing liberal party that has been the largest for years now. They see the state apparatus maybe not as 'evil' but as inefficient and are imposing privatisation anywhere they can. They are for a social safetynet but see this not as a basic right but rather as a tool to get people back into the labor market as fast as possible. They are therefore not for big government but for privatisation and the shrinking and redirection of the welfare state (and they have been succeeding). Also we have the Fvd which is far-right conservative leaning less hard on the populism as say a PVV. They became the largest party recently (not that matters that much because in our fragmented system the biggest party has 14% of the vote). Fvd had a literal Ian Rand stan that was pretty prominent until he got pushed away for his bell curvy talking points in an interview, and their leader has literally said that it should be LAW that the government shrinks a certain percentage each year.
Not even conservatives in America are really for small government, given they just spend a lot in military etc. They're just against the state providing basic needs and taxing big corporations.
@@movimentodoscacos I noticed that too. Kind of weird. They are for big government on the issues they like and against it on the issues they dont like.
Actually is a leftist belief
@@robinstark1047 Yea, I know what you mean, there are differences about the proportions of big government, but I would argue that in the eyes of a right-wing American or libertarian all of this is still pretty big government. I mean if we go into the details of it, many Americans are shocked by the extend that we Europeans let and want the government to interfere with our lives (social safety, rules and regulations, healthcare etc.). The word government has not necessarily a negative connotation for any European from the left to the right.
This was a really good chat.
Never expected to see a Tara Babcock comment in a Destiny video in 2019 but I'm here for it.
Holy shit what are the chances
Douglas, repeat after me:
"If, for whatever reason, racism would continue to be a problem even with a more equitable economic system, we'd use the same methods to fight it as we use now. We legislate against it, set up watchdog organisations, create awareness campaigns and whatever else we need. This problem is worse under capitalism, and would very likely be lessened under capitalism, but it's possible we'd need to do more to stamp it out (almost) completely."
You're not giving any ground by allowing for this possibility. We don't need to solve every problem 100% via economics.
That's the way you deal with it in a system where power is collectivized, in a classless system the power is not supposed to be collectivized, so still not sure how this would work.
@@broken_arch You and I have very different conceptions of class then, because divisions of labor and authority would definitely still exist in mine.
@Sorrious Sad Oh, do explain.
If you're a historical materialist then you do have to solve every problem with economics.
@@cas343 If you want to be an idiotic one, sure. Theory has progressed quite a bit since Marx.
Destiny is the subject of the book Capitalist Realism.
Destiny is the subject of liberal bourgeois ideology long before mark fisher rebranded communism as postmodernism.
@@gmail8483 Well, obviously the bourgeois liberal subject predates Fisher's description of the situation. Still want to plug the book as I've enjoyed it and it's a very digestible piece on the subject.
@@hericiumcoralloides5025 Yeah, it's surprisingly digestible, even though I had to google a few words haha
@@gmail8483 Could you elaborate on your fisher take? It seems nonsensical to me but I'd like to hear your perspective
A good conversation! Holy shit.
@@user-gc1wj8tt2p it was very cringe when he was like, dont make an economic argument, only i get to.
I like Douglas.
I like to imagine he's an academic Vergil from dmc3
Why, he seems clueless?
Destiny didn't try to dunk on his guest and I enjoyed it more this way.
Wierd how it is only a Destiny problem in your view.
RanEncounter how did you manage to read that sentence and formulate such a wrong take? He didn’t say it was an only destiny problem.
@@bigboy2217 Do you know what OPs sentence implies? It implies that in previous video Destiny tried to dunk on his guests. And to that I said it is "Wierd how it is only a Destiny problem in your view." implying Destinys behavior is heavily related to who he is speaking to. A conversation is a two way street. If OP believed in this idea too he would have not said what he said.
@@RanEncounter I don't know if OP was criticizing Destiny and blaming solely him for dunking on guests. Obviously with some people like No BS it's unavoidable. I think he was just stating that he prefers debates with a more respectful tone.
But I do think Destiny can be overly confrontational and become too focused on dunking on people, like in the debates with Mike from PA.
@@thedunne1980 Please read the comment again. It is clear that Destiny trying to dunk on people was the problem. Not people trying to dunk on each other, but DESTINY trying to dunk on people.
Destiny really made a great point in regards to class and race. In a stateless society wherein the burden of labor doesn't determine your ability to have control over the material apparatus' you can still have prejudice. In a hypothetical state-less america, if the demographic skews white you can still stifle the political influence of minorities by virtue of prejudice. The history of white marxists and exclusion of black and brown individuals in discourse is plenty big and easy to find historical examples of. Marx himself wasn't the most pc person ever.
isn't this why intersectional theory took off among leftist groups over 30 years ago? I mean it's good if destiny is seeing those nuances, but it's only really a 'great point' among leftists who are complete class reductionists which is an extreme minority
@@LackingSaint its a great point regardless of who says it. You would be surprised how common class reductionism actually is. Most people who ascribe to intersectionality and are vocal about it on the internet are often times virtue signaling. It doesn't seem like destiny is putting up a facade with his argument. This kind of rhetoric needs to be engaged honestly more often. Cancel culture is an example of dishonesty and flippant use of identity politics.
@@LackingSaint I may have not answered your question properly, but to be fair I'm not sure what you're actually asking.
@@ManuelMartinez-dy7gv all good, the question was rhetorical. I don't really know what cancel culture has to do with class reductionism, though to be fair I also don't know what the hell most people mean when they say "cancel culture" at this point because it can be anything from death threats and harassment to calling someone out for saying something blatantly racist/sexist/homophobic etc.
@@LackingSaint I'm just saying people are more concerned with social acceptance than the actual ideas themselves. The man being interviewed is a good example of someone picking and choosing ideas from Marxism that are relevant to him. Cancel culture is born out of online leftism as a way to maintain this "woke" culture meme. It doesn't seem people are actually engaging these ideas, but instead wearing them as some sort of moral descriptor.
Doug Lain is amazing I'm so glad he got on.
Yes he was amazin until he made the per capita argument and then blamed capitalism for racism.
@@BPOOP1000 to deny a materialist understanding of racism is to be ignorant.
As a former socialist sympathizer I have a few questions
1. How does freedom work without money? I. e. how do you "keep score"?
2. How does society work without authority?
3. What would happen to those not willing to participate in this form of society since there will always be opposition?
@@justanothernick3984 Stop spamming your dumb ass loaded questions.
Red Nex Pretty much sums up every answer given to the questions you’ve put forth.
Damn, every time he debates a lefty now it just ends up as "how does your system defeat racism, and btw, racism is innate to the human condition. Go."
well, people are attributing tons of tendencies to capitalism that have not been shown to be inherent to it, so this will always come up
@@ryry20002 do I really need to say how that begs the question you were complaining about AND goes back to my comment?
@@ryry20002 no the double standard is the other way round. Capitalism is bad because it reinforce racism and doesn't prevent climate change.
Destiny: how does you system prevent those things?
Leftist: it probably doesn't but capitalism is bad and socialism is good
Destiny:Yeah I don't find that argument convincing.
@@ryry20002 Moving towards socialism is fine
@@ryry20002 if we do some small experiments in a small scale, more coop giving workers as shareholders. We adopt what works and scrap the rest.
dudes 48 but he talks like he's 84.
The stuff about Roman slavery Destiny doesn't know about... Slaves could become free and no longer be viewed like property... Also Roman slavery didn't have to do with race... At least, not necessarily... For example, the pater familias ("father of the family" and basically the head of the household) during the event of a childbirth in the household would do one of two things: 1. Lift the child as a sign of acceptance into the household. 2. Leave the child and turn his back to it.
If the pater familias chose not to accept the child into his household then the child would be abandoned where it'd quite likely either die or alternatively have some slave discover it, at which point the child would become a slave despite having biologically had 2 Roman parents... Though, the slave could also hypothetically become free if they proved they were a Roman citizen (rather difficult to do though) so I guess you could point to that... Another thing though is there were times where enslaved people became gladiators and could basically earn their freedom and live among Roman citizens fine... There was a Roman gladiator named Flamma who was Syrian and he was offered this freedom 4 times (though rejected it every time since he really enjoyed being a gladiator)
This is a super naive view of Roman race/slavery. I love learning about this sort of stuff, but it's super dicey to learn about Freedman and instantly jump to the conclusion that woman slaves were treated more decently. Race definitively had a part in Roman slavery, just look at Livy, Vitruvius, Juvenal and many others calling easterners/syrians intrinsically meant to serve. Idk what all the paterfamilias stuff had to do with this other than yes Roman society was intensely patriarchal and the man of the family could choose who was in it sure.
@@cicerian3897 This is like 10 months later, perhaps I just poorly worded it, but I think the main idea of the comment when it comes to race was that the slavery wasn't about enslaving some inferior race... There were also plenty of Romans who became slaves within the Roman Empire so it wasn't nearly as race-based as the trans-atlantic slave trade... That being said, the Roman attitude towards non-Romans (especially ones that weren't Greek or Egyptian, but even those to some extent) was that these other people were inferior to Romans... So I'm pretty sure Romans were more okay with the idea of enslaving non-Romans, but they were still open to enslaving Romans as long as there wasn't a way they could prove they were actually Roman (which was practically impossible when the slave was a baby abandoned by their father for someone else to find)... I mean, I guess on the off chance they could somehow prove they were Roman they'd maybe be able to get freedom, but this typically didn't happen in practice after a Roman became a slave...
Anyway, aside from that another thing is I never really mentioned how "women slaves were treated more decently", so I'm not sure where you got that from... It's not really something I commented on...
guy was cool until he got into the class reductionism bit
What destiny and yourself are missing is the racial capitalism component of modern world, Doug is trying to get there but don't have the words for it. Cedric j Robinson explains the concept very thoroughly in his black marxism book
I don't know, he seemed reductionist from the start with the idea that leftist talking points don't have an "alien outsider" component.
@@MaximusTCR when do you think racism started?
@@RVGODZILLA My point has nothing to with the origin of racism.
marxism doesnt have intersectionality off rip, you have to add it to make it into leftism talking points. marxism is a tool, depends on how its wielded.
Jesus, Destiny still doesn't know what a tankie is and loves strawmaning his opponents as such.
A tankie is someone who fetishizes the authoritarianism of the Soviet Union and Maoist China. Yes, that means they also fetishize the iconography, but at the end of the day, the vast majority of tankies have little regard for Marxism or any form of dialectical materialism. Tankies can either be edgy memelords or folks that actually like the authoritarianism of the USSR and China etc. They sometimes are close to Nazbols but not always quite the same.
Strawmaning breadtube into this pigeon hole is incredibly disingenuous. Especially since the USSR and China were not the first to create things like the red flag, or the hammer and sickle. Many of these forms of iconography have been around well before these two states and even to this day they still are used in many leftist movements, just look at the flag color of the Labor party in the UK as a small example.
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot “Tankies have little regard for Marxism or Dialectical Materialism” ??????.......
if you’re referring to Marxism’s essence this is such a weaselly copout...
Edit: also, the Nazi flag was around far prior to its use in the Nazi regime. Is that grounds for its continued use regardless of what it makes universally salient to everyone??
Yeah it was idiotic and disingenuous when he said that all the major lefty youtubers are tankies. lol wtf is he talkin about.
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot it’s not a strawman when it’s 90% of online lefties. He even specified that he knows that it’s not representative of all lefties
@@ryanapodaca9042 Can you explain then why Destiny refers to all left-tube as being tankies? Despite many of them not even using the spooky iconography he refers to?
@@svpantheon7339 Yes, he likes to make hyperbolic statements until he gets called out then he has to reel it in, only to double down later again.
"Recriminalizing homosexuality?" That was something that Stalin did. Homosexuality was legalized under Lenin.
That isn't even entirely true. Like saiyng it was "legalized under Stalin" is a pretty disingenuous argument if you look into why it was "legal" so to say.
And Stalin? Yeah, Stalin was a reactionary prick.
I really like this kind of interaction with Destiny, him just asking the right questions and letting the speaker trot out their thoughts and only interrupting when they say something pivoty or that needs further definition; this way the person effectively hoists their flags and with Destiny adding the right questions, we can see what their views really are.
This is way better!!!!! Thanks to Douglas Lain for participating.
Notice how much more information and discussion was shared.....rather than just debating.
MORE OF THIS STEVEN!!!!!!!!!!
"I wanna quote Zizek"
Saw it coming from mile away.
The Soviet system was more dehumanizing because it required its prisoners to thank it for their de facto execution.
Zizek would agree with you and the example still works. It's a twisted expression of the communist core ideology
@@bbHoodski the Communist core ideology can and never will be achieved. The ussr couldn't even get to the Socialist faze ffs. When will you people wake up? Dictators aren't going to give up their control of the state once you give it to them.
@@mindfreak078589 dawg stop with knee jerk reaction whenever you see the word communism. It's like Pavlov's dogs with you people.
I, nor Zizek, believe that communism is a viable political structure. My comment had nothing to do with supporting it.
@@bbHoodski >.>
@@bbHoodski bro Zizek is a communist. Wdym
Destiny finally made some distinctions on Leftism in this debate
Only been trying and waiting for 2 years ........
Ha I'd hate to necro your comment but look at his recent videos especially the one with Kraut, basically he says lefties are dumb and should look up how bad the Soviet Union was before they talk about capitalism.
@@giansideros Yea, his takes are dumb as fuck lol
@@giansideros Did he really say that? That makes me want to bash my head into a desk
@@qaiser648 Wait, why?
This was my favorite conversation I’ve heard Destiny have thus far.
I don't think you understood what Douglas Lain was saying even through he explained it very well to you.
i second this
To be fair, I think that went both ways. Especially in the second half they were entirely talking past each other. Both making valid points about their thing but that thing wasn't the same for both. With a little good faith and another 2-3 hours this could just get somewhere productive.
Yeah but that's what every person who is left leaning thinks, they think that if someone doesn't agree, they must not understand. This way you can never be wrong, and I think that's a ridiculous way to deflect something that may be wrong with YOUR beliefs
Destiny's thought experiment about lynching applies to any democratic system. He is using it to show that socialism doesn't solve all problems. A good response to this is to agree that socialism doesn't create a utopia.
Incoming Far Leftists vs Liberals battle in the comments in 3....2......1
ISIS and Islamic extremists/realists slaughtered millions of Muslims
Communists slaughtered over 200 million and currently enslave billions
Ree Lord - "Some people did something" 🗡️ 🧟
Welcome to the REE-VENGERS #NotMyLatte 🥛
Dark Ether-sama (≖ლ≖๑ )ﾌ sowwy b-but I don't understandsi (;＾◇＾;)ゝi'm weally sowwy (＃⌒∇⌒＃)ゞfowgive me (≧д≦ヾ)
Communists never even killed 100 million people.
@@chevchelios3904 lol, what is this comment?
@@toddharig8142 Inspired by the heroes of the left like Ilhan Omar A.K.A. the brother fluffer 👳🏾 and AOC, ohhh shes so so 💗 🥰 😍 hot right now, but so taaaardeddd!!!
the most calm chat. this is one of the best ones
This guy just wants to just forgive the results if the intentions are good..
Finally someone who can form coherent arguments and list off great leftest talking points!
This guy may fail to answer some questions... Yet, in one video he made a more appealing case for socialism that Hasan and Vaush through all their careers in RUclips.
Don't bring up Vaush lol, we don't claim him
LMAO this dude said stalins concentration camps were so much more humanizing than the Nazi camps because they were forced to right happy birthday cards to Stalin🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣. Why did you let him get away with that destiny?
I feel like the problem with the question of how you would deal with majority-minority problems in an anarcho-whatever system is that there are a nearly infinite number of social abstractions that could be created to deal with the problem. Each would have different levels of justness within the hierarchies and effectiveness at preventing the oppression of the minority. It puts people on the spot when they have to juggle all of those variables and go on the record with a half baked idea that they can only assume you will immediately critique.
Just like in nature, those infinite systems will just collapse into the one that affords society the greatest survivability, not the most just. Like exiling a village into the wilderness, uprooting people without a viable solution is just cruelty, with a just chance they'll find better land.
I really feel like Destiny just hates Tankies. Which is good but like real lefties do too.
Who are the "real" lefties then?
@@webranger1 anti-authoritarians. Left-ideology is generally radically democratic in that it opposes any threat to self determination. This includes both dictators and the tyranny of capital and generational wealth.
@@dickyboi4956 "Left-wing politics supports social equality and egalitarianism, often in opposition to social hierarchy."
first sentence of the wikipedia definition. Authoritarian leftists exist, but are self-contradictory by definition which is why some people say they aren't "real leftists".
You're right though that this is somewhat reductionist, as it's doesn't inherently exclude you from the category of leftist to believe that some social hierarchy is necessary to reduce other hierarchy. That said, the idea that tankies are leftists is kind of silly in light of the fact that the Soviet Union was deeply hierarchical.
The conversation is actually pretty complex, but the long and short of it is that most leftists nowadays don't like the Soviet Union's practices, but will be quick to explain how some of the negative things that were supposedly done are misrepresented and overblown in the west.
Accurate enough for you?
Unoriginal Overlord no. They’re stating exactly what Vaush has been on a tear about lately: Tankie’s aren’t lefty’s from a principled perspective. They don’t agree with the basics of leftism. They’re in it for the aesthetics and edginess of it. It’s an act of rebellion for rebellions sake, not an act of rebellion for the sake of bettering the world and communities in which they inhabit. This is why you’ll see a cross over of followers from fascism>Tankie-ism, and vice versa. It’s not proving the horseshoe theory correct, it’s just showing that some people only acknowledge the aesthetics and history of a political cause without ever touching on the theory and beliefs inherent to the ideologies themselves.
Most leftists would agree on this position: a fundamental precept of leftism (especially in a modern context) is that its anti-authoritarian, anti-imperialist, pro individual rights, wholly democratic and secular. Those are the main tenants of leftism. If you’re not on board with at least those 5 out of 6 of those then you’re not a tried and true leftist. You’re a cosplayer. I say 5 or of 6 as you can be a religious person and still be a leftist. I’m talking about secularity of the state. Liberation theology isn’t secular, yet still very much rooted in the basic fundamentals of leftism; though they wouldn’t impose their private religious beliefs on you as an individual via the state.
Rational Grace This^^^
This is a perfect synopsis of what I mean. It’s not so much a no true Scotsman fallacy as it is a definitional dispute. It’s a dispute grounded in the ignorance of those who claim to be leftists while embracing rigidly hierarchical, undemocratic anti-egalitarian aspects of the USSR and Maoist China. There are defenses to be made of each of those governments, for sure. But wholly embracing every aspect of both of those communist regimes, while decrying any and all criticism of them as propaganda is not only wrong, it hurst the cause of leftism in countries such as the US. We still have a hangover and foul taste from the Soviet Union; the last way to win support and enact a revolution would be to cling to it for dear life. We’ll be left clinging to the hammer and sickle with our cold, dead hands if that’s the approach we take.
Destiny's points about racism are actually clumsy. Obviously Black Wall Street was destroyed because of the high class of the black people in the community and the resentment of whites built on the history of racism at the time. Obviously there would be racism historically contributing to social friction in future societies that grow from this one, but the structure of our society and economy drives the process of rooting out racism.
This was the best debate in a while
Wow. An actual educational debate/conversation on Destiny’s channel! Awesome!
This is probably the best debate I've heard since discovering the Destiny channel. Wish it would have been longer but Lain seemed to want to end the discussion. This is the kind of information Destiny needs if he is to progress into political discussions. Did not detect any BS here at all.
Isn't it a special kind of cruelty to make people in concentration camps write birthday cards to their captor?
Have Douglas Lain on more often!
After watching these debates I find it a little sad that we're stuck arguing between the status quo, and hundreds years old ideas like Marxism. I guess it's nice that alternative political ideologies have finally gained traction in countries like the U.S., but unfortunately all its proved is exactly how sheeplike and unimaginative most people are. These days calling yourself a socialist or an anarcho-communist or whatever-ist seems to be more about self-branding and internet tribalism than anything else. Is it possible to come up with a new way of doing things that is also not the status quo, or have we really exhausted all the ideas out there in spite of the world having changed completely since Marx's time?
These alternative ideas were popular in the U.S 100 years ago too, just weren't implemented. Like Marx himself said, the traditions of the dead hang on the brains of the living. We can't seem to escape old ideas.
I wonder if you learn anything after 3 years, because you don't seem to even understand the basic of Marx
This was a really good discussion and I thought Lain was doing well until he began discussing racism. I would not say that he holds the majority view that racism will magically end under a classless society. It's a separate issue that must also be accounted for in order to create a more just and equitable society. Although I would say ending racism might be even more difficult than ending capitalism
I think the idea is that racism exists because of tribalism (which communism indirectly wants to end), but since tribalism is an inherently a human evolutionary trait I don't think that it's gonna change anytime soon.
So yeah, give it a couple thousand to tens of thousands years and it'll go away
I think he sticks to it cause he has no other way to adress the problem.
Which shows that he fundamentally lacks the understanding required to actually solve the issue.
I mean tribalism is a thing and racism is essentially hyper-tribalism. His system doesnt adress that and I think he holds onto the hope that if his system comes into place it will just disappear.
Ending racism under communism might prove to be even more difficult
Epileptic Wizard Sure but tribalism is not necessarily based on the looks of people around you. It’s generally based on the “tribe” that you grew up with. This tribe you grew up with is heavily and directly influenced by material conditions of different races and how they are segregated based off of socioeconomic maneuverability.
@@erinanglin1001
But, you can agree humans have a natural bias like white babies wanting to play with white babies because hey they are similar to me
Destiny getting points from chat is the highlight of this debate.
Saw a comment that said “destiny used the term mob rule” the cope is real
Came here to remind Stephen to please log off Twitter for the love of god
You can take away distinction between just survival levels by just having a safety net. Now if you don't have a distinction between the extra ambitious then you devalue incentive
I'm more or less a socialist but I'm with Destiny on this one. So many (mainly white) socialists think that racism and prejudice in general would be solved if we just establish socialism, but I'm not so optimistic. Asians, for example, have been doing well relatively speaking in terms of income but still faces lots of discrimination and prejudice in the west. Of course racism is related to class, but there are different ways in which it can function that I believe would still exist even in a post-capitalist society, and Destiny gave some good examples.
Destiny not to meme on you but you really need to read history and some theory to engage in these kind of conversations
Issue is the “theory” is just armchair philosophy: people way more learned and virtuous than yourself tried to usher a socialist utopia. Failed every time.
@@Cagliostro85 truf
Wait what? We don't live in tribes anymore therefore no natural tribal tendencies? That's not how evolution works.
Selection pressures impact evolutionary direction of species over time - lots of time. If a species has been shaped by a particular selection pressure resulting, for instance, in a proclivity towards tribal identification and behavior that doesn't simply go away because you have a few hundred years or so without the selection pressures that made the species so in the first place.
The idea that tribal identification is predicated on class inequality or largely driven by it in ways it wouldn't be in under other social schemata is frankly speaking illiterate to the research on human tribalism.
Social tribes have nothing to do with tribalism concretely as a political order in academia outside of concrete history and anthropology, and is found in almost all human endeavors. Generally, when we speak of tribalism today, it's understood in its psychological and sociological usage.
It can be triggered as easily as simply having a bunch of randos in a room and assigning them different color bands to wear on their arms.
We see tribalism expressed in religion, sports, and even fucking playgrounds, over both concrete and abstract/symbolic differences that have no direct relation to social class at all, real or precieved.
The problem with tribalism is arguably literally one of the biggest hurdles to human unity and progress at scale, which means that any effort to create human social systems generally necessitates instances of checks and balances to protect outgroups from being made and mistreated.
The idea class emancipation will stop expressions of tribalism is frankly speaking naive as fuck, when you could argue the fact of class inequality to itself be a product of tribalism at scale.
I don't think he disagrees with the existence of tribalism, but with appealing to a human nature that's unable to change. It's like in all the Destiny debates against far right guys when they want to argue that black and white people can't live together because they're naturally predisposed to being tribal or men are naturally aggressive, while women are naturally submissive. And in all of this cases Destiny would have pushed against that and called the bullshit but now he kinda does the same appeal to nature when talking about why socialism can't work
@@asphyxia8700
I didn't say that he did. I said that he thouroughly fails to correctly characterize how selection pressures work and what tribalist tendencies mean.
The fact that we do not live in tribes anymore has no bearing, as of this time, on whether we express tribalism in when in social groups per today.
The argument Destiny was making is neither a naturalistic fallacy nor analoguous to some right of center political view base in the naturalistic fallacy.
The argument Destiny was making was literally just a question of how does your system account for human innate tribalistic tendencies, to which the reply was the thoughtless dismissal of that as a problem because "we no longer live in tribes".
Destiny's point is not the same as insisting racism cannot be dealt with, or that humans cannot at some point or in some way grow beyond our tribal tendecies - it is merely challenging the asssumption that 1.) Racism will magical largely disappear if you root out class and 2.) That a system will functionally be able to tackle tribalism without a proper understanding and acknowledging of its nature.
If you proposed that we could make a cancerless society if we just got rid of class, and I said you can't without first addressing the medical biology of cancer you would not come back to me and say my argumeny is similar to that of alt-righters, though in essence this is exactly the same.
Man Destiny comes off less intelligent when he debates people with brains.
edit: lmfao, before y'all jump to call Lain an idiot maybe listen to the words he says in the video?
Stalin made people in education camps wrie birthday cards.. Lol.
@@HucklePeel You realize he wasn't defending Stalin there but clarifying the why the equivalency between Nazis and Stalinists makes no sense, right? This is basically the Naked Ape style contextless gotcha but against Destiny's opponent instead.
Remember when at 55-ish minutes, “the guy with brains” wasn’t able to understand how racism could ruin a socialist situation.
Maybe, he'd have to find someone with one of those first for us to be certain though.
@@rationalgrace4413 Fine I'll elaborate, I was laughing at how incredibly dishonest or unintelligent you would have to be to make that statement.
To downgrade the conditions of the gulags to say "well they made birthday cards for stalin" and not mention that people died due starvation and exhaustion. Seems pretty dumb to me.
There is only one meaningful difference between the concentration camps. Is that they didn't try to actively kill people.
Yet somehow mangaged a death toll of Conservatively over 1 million.
Douglas is one of the best of RUclips.
This was a good conversation. I feel like if Douglas fleshed out his points more and was able to understand where Destiny disagrees with him specifically they could come back and try another conversation and see what happens. I feel like Lane has a lot more to say but doesn’t necessarily have those ideas well articulated. Part of presenting ideas is articulating them to yourself before you can really communicate them.
I think that although racism may be embedded in Capitalism now, but that doesn’t mean it goes away with Capitalism or that it doesn’t happen before it either.
I think the argument should not be that socialism would end racism but that it would not exacerbate it to the extent capitalism does.
I think the argument was that socialism is predicated on there not being racism, or that racism is an obstacle to socialism.
Destiny not understanding the difference between the foundations of Nazis and that of Communist revolution is very... Smooth brained.
I actually don't think he doesn't get it and just doesnt WANT to get it.
The only thing more dangerous to breadtube than destiny is breadtube
most of those guys are unrealistic. unfortunate really.
Joe Projects I must say I agree dear sir
As a feudal lord when I heard these sky high unrealistic ideas that the peasants should govern themselves I scoff air I drifted off to sleep as destiny crushed the socialists who thought the workers should govern themselves
Doug Lain isn't part of the dirtbag left, fuck you
@@hideyoshilacan66 Can't tell if it's sarcasm or not, but if it is then it's brilliant.
Destiny, if you want a conversation on anarchism, get "Beau of The Fifth Column" on your show.
thanks fer a referral to this guy. I had to vet em when I saw the "A" word and I approve. I appreciate that he doesn't explicitly tout the ideology around like a flag: makes for a wider audience and perhaps better content.
This dude is such a nice guest, imma sub to him
Read Eugene Debs speech while running for President, and learn why comrade is used.
djsuupaa who is your comment for?
@@jd8184 anyone who wonders why people still say it, and don't consider themselves "tankie."
Mind providing a link? Struggling to find the one you are talking about.
@@wolfganghumboldt4830 The Canton, Ohio speech: www.marxists.org/archive/debs/works/1918/canton.htm
Yeah, if you count how many people know of this speech's existence vs how many people think it's a communist Russia stereotype among the users your point doesn't hold. Even if decades ago some people used 'comrade' because of that speech, it's not what the users believe now so it's not why they use it
Destiny was forced to write birthdaycards in this debate
I found Destiny through D&D, through of Neil and Lilly while I have known about Douglas Lain for a long long time due to Zizek. Funny how things come around. Great to see Douglas listen to and debated decantly well by someone that isn't on the same political "side" and does not necessarily agree with him.
These comments truly are a remnant of when Destiny’s audience was much more tankie adjacent, and Destiny had to do a big purge.
This debate is so strange because Douglas Lain does cultural criticisms, in the same vein as Zizek, adorno, Althusser, etc. This is far from what destiny does which is data driven economic "analysis" or debate.
Critical theory vs. half-baked, cherry-picked, liberal positivism.
I have witnessed Destiny on numerous occasions, reject evidence that is inconvenient for his pre-hel conclusions. This is known as Cherry-Picking which is a branch in the tree of the Confirmation Bias fallacy. He will only accept that which confirms his views, and reject that which doesn't, and he considers that "Finding the truth".
Destiny’s insistence on directly comparing all slavery as exactly the same was super annoying
Banger debate!
Great conversation
Dude started out strong but his arguments became so meek and semantic after a while
Yes! I felt exactly the same way. His last point that we have biologically evolved past having genes for tribalism and it's just all socially constructed?? Like come on man
Maybe I'm super naive but I feel like Destinys white vs black point only makes sense if 100% of the white people are racist or at least a number the overcomes the normies and minorities. Which is a pretty big grant.
And, I feel like Douglas isnt an anarchist anyway... I don't know.
And after bringing up Chattel slavery, Destiny jumped to Roman slavery and India caste system which enslaved people that looked like the slavers, and isnt at all like chattel slavery anyhow so I missed how it enforced his argument. Like, current day slavery is within culture groups and is normally called indentured servitude.
Do you think that it is stretch for white coworkers to vote in a white boss who won't care about minority issues.
@@HucklePeel I think it's a stretch to say they'll vote in a secret racist who then fires all the colored people who will still be paid somthing not to work. Yeah, that seems stupid and counterproductive especially considering those that share a racist perspective absolutely abhor impoverished people living off the social safety net right? This hypothetical doesn't follow logically.
@@andrewprofitt6898 you added a whole bunch things to my hypothetical.
All I'm saying is that it wouldn't be strange that in a white majority coop that the worker will vote for someone White.
He doesn't have to be racist to not care about black issues.
@@HucklePeel First, Destinys Hypo definately implies mistreatment, dont weasel.
Second how much is your job boss supposed to deal with minority issues anyway?
@@andrewprofitt6898 In a Capitalist society not much. In a Socialist society probably a lot especially in an anarcho communist\socialist society. When Government has nothing to do with the workplace a lot of problems could ensue. When we don't have protections for certain classes problems tend to arise. Are you being purposely naive?
Don't socialist and communist all look like they live in a basement with no haircut, stuck to a computer chair eating chips out of a bag, and yelling "Mom, meatloaf!!!!" Lol.
The fixation on the word comrade is born out of ignorance on Destiny's part. The word comes from the term "camarada". It means chamber mate in Iberian, and proceeds the concept of communism. Comradery and comradeship have been used to describe friends/colleges/siblings for a long time. I think soviets used a similar term, but the association mostly came from western media.
You will find the terms comrade and comradery all over the US military writings and slogans.
This take isn't isn't a result of Destiny's ignorance, but understanding basic ideas of how societies work. Sorry to be a buzzkill, but terminologies can change meaning over time. A word coming from a innocuous background doesnt mean that it can't have a more sinister meaning in a different time/culture.
If I see a bunch of people using swaskita iconography, I'm not going to assume that they're adherents of Hinduism or some other indian religion. Guess what? The meaning of that symbol has changed in our western context from it's religious origin. It's no longer a positive symbol. It's quite the opposite actually.
Regardless of whatever you know about the origin of the word "comrade", that doesn't change the way it's used now and the surrounding culture involving it's usage that Destiny is referring to.
@@hawkxlr The point I'm trying to make is that the word widely has nothing to do with communism today, or in the past. If someone says to you "my brother and I have great comradery" I don't think most people would think of communism. If an American soldier described her "comrades in arms" it would be the same. Shit head tankies definitely are using the term ironically, but that represents a minute fringe group compared to others using it.
@@scottster8858 I completely agree with you, and so would Destiny, but everything you're saying can also be applied to the swastika. It also has a widely used non-nazi application. If I was in India, and a local had a flag with the swastika on it, the context wouldn't indicate that they're a Nazi - not true if I was at an American political rally though. The same is applicable to "comrade". If a soldier uses the term to refer to one of their squadmates, that's different than someone using it in a left leaning political discussion.
Just because words and iconography can have different meanings in different contexts, it doesn't mean that no instances of their usage can be interpreted as dubious. The "ok" sign is a perfect example of this.
@@hawkxlr Difference is the word comrade has long been used and is still in use in demsoc and even social democratic parties in the west. The Labour party here in the UK use it regularly and it's seen as completely normal (even right wing media outlets don't really talk about it). I think it's more in America where there's the ignorance on this.
@@nedlightowlers5168 Ugh, again, this is nothing that me or Destiny would disagree with. When Destiny interacts with politics, the vast majority of it is is American centric. You can talk about how comrade is used more broadly in other political spheres, but that's no different than saying the Swastika has a different meaning in other cultures. It's not a matter of ignorance, but irrelevance.
35:45 that’s the only way third parties will gain ground in the American political system. Grow local political parties which represent the interests of the local and regional governments with the goal of gaining seats in The house and the Senate. Farmers in the Midwest have completely different political leanings than Pacific Northwest or southwest America. Greater diversity of political representation in Congress will also pull the two major political parties closer to the center and break the unwillingness to compromise.
Class isn't the source for racial prejudice, but it did and still institutionalize racism, so much so that the concept of race as we understand race today was founded to distinguish who was PROPERTY and who wasn't.
All i hear in this discussion is the marxist tendency of Douglas to refer everything to the base(economic system) and the tendency of Destiny to disagree with the primary role of economy in favor of culture, state and other superstructures.
The woe of this discussion was that this fundamental philosophical disagreement was never explicitly realized and both of them kept bringing up anectodal evidence to support their views.
Finally a good discussion on this topic
Destiny should’ve pulled a Jesse lee Peterson just answer yes or no
I came here to watch a debate but ended up getting a lesson on Marxism. Love it.
Ok nvm Destiny became a chud in the second half
@@kiiyll neocentrist moment
@@kiiyll no he didn't
holy fuck I like these kinds of discussions. I wish you could talk in this fashion more often
I'm not very far in the debate, but does anyone know what Destiny means by tanky? People tend use it in different ways. I think he just means someone who defends aspects of the Soviet union in general.
Yeah it seems he's using it to mean someone who's more sympathetic towards the soviet union than they are critical.
@@maximthefox Someone who defends socialism as it has been, someone who actually has an example. Thus he can't say "boy you dont have examples"
When you talk about slavery and discrimination this is a issue of structure. Liberals acknowledge it through terms like 'structural racism'. When you look throughout all of the instances of slavery you ask yourself one question and you'll find your answer. People are enslaved to what end/purpose? The answer has remained the same throughout time. Did you get it?
I see what you getting at but the justice system is a good example of being discriminated against on race not class
@@HucklePeel refer to the question again, therein you will realize the answer never changes. People sure do make a lot of money in our 'justice' system/structure don't they? The race descrimination is structural, but not without justification and purpose regardless of morality.
@@Pk_Angel I don't think I agree with you on this I don't think judges get more money by giving black people longer sentences... It's bias, the idea that black are more violent or less reformable
@@HucklePeel check if said judges receive kickbacks, (most do during appointment) or have direct contributions to the private prison system/structure. Racism plays a smaller part than people like to think. Its just easier to justify your actions when you 'other' someone but it isn't the root of it.
Next time someone doesn't understand tribalism, drop the Ford versus Chevrolet driver rivalry as an example.
the reason slavery existed in roman times is because the core of capitalism existed back then too, any economy that has exchange is still operating on the same fundamental mechanic as capitalism whether it happened 50k years ago or 500 or 50, whether it had "democracy" or feudalism or monarchy, all of them have exchange based production, use whatever umbrella term for it you want but it's always about exchanging capital so i think we should call it all capitalism
I wish douglas early on elaborated on th3 differences between nazi germany and USSR. Nazis were a reactionary group that wanted to return to a better time, and even without the anyi-semetism, they wanted to return back to a time where there was a facist leader. While the russian revolution wasnt that kind of reactionary traditional facist state goal, but one rooted in the goal of the proletariat finally having power over their own lives (obviously it went no where near that goal and just went to ultra totalitarian stalinism), but this is all in terms of what douglas and destiny were talking about, sympathizing with the average people's drive towards those 2 different goals.
Nazis => reactionary past
Soviets => new revolutionary future
Bring in Ben Burgis and Wolff
Ben Burgis has already been on: ruclips.net/video/iaKBp9x3CpE/видео.html
Destiny got lectured in this debate
Fan of both these guys
Looks like Destiny have no serious issues with Socialists & Communists - so easy vague theoretical talking with no pressure
"I am not a tanky." Then immediately starts downplaying the interment camps in the soviet union and says that he sympathizes with the revolutionaries that built the gulags.
Lol
The gays were sent to the gulag but at least they were made to make birthday gifts so that should make it fine.
The conflation of Marxism-Leninism and worshipping Stalin was weird but okay. And the talk about race was cringe on both sides. Yes, there is inherent tribalism and that constantly has to be fought by socialists. Idk which socialists he talks to that they reject all identity politics, but I haven’t seen that. But Destiny seems to think that Liberalism is particularly good at protecting minorities from the tyranny of the majority. But all of these reforms had to be fought tooth and nail, a fight which included a lot of white people. It’s somewhat useful in cases of insular communities where most people really are very racist, but only where the power is structured in a way where minorities in those communities can actually appeal to higher authority..which often doesn’t happen...
Because Stalin coined the term.
Edit at around 36:50 that makes Dougs point unintelligible. 36:20 should be around when he starts what he's trying to say about the left doing two things.
Wow. Are we sure that's not a blip in the cam recording software? That's a good catch though.
Doug is completely wrong about how class and identity based discrimination intersect. People were forced into a lower socioeconomic status based on their race or sex, not the other way around.
"To be a conservative, all I have to believe is white supremacy."
"Conservatives value the status quo".
Destiny doesn't seem to understand Right-leaning values AT ALL. He may have been half-joking, but still...After all, Destiny doesn't read books and only learns political ideas from memes...
"Right-leaning values"
I mean from a political theory standpoint this doesn't exist anymore. Gone are the days of a coherent right argument. Used to be you'd have a Hobbes or Malthus or two in the mix, now our right-intellectuals are the Shapiros and Petersons of the world (or flagrant abusers of statistics like Rogoff if you're of the small percent of people who pay attention to real academics).
Rational Grace People who value traditionalism, the Right to Bear Arms, and small government exist. Whatever you would choose to label those people is fine by me...And those people happen to be white, black, gay, trans, and whatever identity-signifier you can think of. Do you really think those people are limited to the talking-heads that' supposedly represent their idealogical beliefs? We don't need to look towards cutting-edge "real academia" to know right from wrong.
@@Americansikkunt
"Value traditionalism", but I'd suppose your definition of conservative wouldn't value islamic traditionalism and the extremist expressions of Sharia law enforced by ISIS, correct? If so you don't actually value traditionalism for the sake of it, but some other set of values that that's a standin for, what are those? because I doubt they're clearly defined.
Small government is actually something many leftists would agree with you on, so it's not "essentially conservative". The general conservative trend in America is to support smaller social welfare programs but greater military spending (as every conservative president since the onset of the Cold War has).
Again, many on the left would agree with you on right to bear arms. None of what you've mentioned here is essentially conservative positioning from an ideological standpoint... it's cultural.
And the distinction there DOES matter, because you're not actually advocating a coherent system of government here based on ideological beliefs. You're advocating for the success of a given political tribe. Now I'm not going to sugarcoat it and say liberals don't do this too, they do. The thing is though that there is coherent political thought among liberals and the left. There is no rational set of conservative ideals that form the basis of a reasonable system of governance anymore, just some vague assertions as to what justice might look like.
Rational Grace "none of what you mentioned here is essentially conservative".
Interesting. That tells me the so-called Nazis, white supremacists, and racists don't differ in belief on most things. That also tells me people are being falsely labeled as Nazis, white supremacists, and racist for holding the same beliefs as the accusers.
Rational Grace What could be more vague that "Moral Relativism"? Especially when it relates to Justice?
Destiny is wrong about Roman slavery, there definitely where slave rights and class was the deciding factor.
id be willing to listen. but i don't think anyone can read what you just said.
What headphones is destiny using?
Pretty excited to watch this. Destiny has been influential in my departure from dogmatic support of leftism, but Zero Books remains a pillar of rationality among leftist channels to me. I expect this will be as relaxing a conversation as the "debate" with Peter coffin :)
The convo was okay until they got to race.
That shit legit pissed me the hell off
SJNaka101, Exactly what arguments did Destiny make that caused you to have a falling out, and perhaps more importantly, why were your views so dependent on predominately anarchist youtubers? Marxism is far more advanced than Anarchism and provides a materialist perspective on issues and solutions, the notion that you have to create the right conditions to implement the right ideas, rather than the contrary notion of 'idealism', which asserts that Good Ideas are all that are necessary for creating a better future. Frankly, your falling out of leftism seems much more like an increased level of disdain of anarchist tendencies for their inability to answer questions on very complex questions that Marxist would have no trouble answering. Notice how Destiny hasn't focused a lot on "Marxist" in general, and has only focused on people who are not theory-intensive, not well read, or even people who claim to be a "leftist" but have one of the worst interpretations of Socialism of all time (Caleb Maupin). Even in those conversations, Destiny couldn't deal with evidence that directly countered his views, and refused to revise his views with confronted with the evidence.
So I have to wonder, what did Destiny say that could have made you detach yourself from leftism all-together, rather than explore the other much more Marx-Engels focused tendencies of Leftism?