Whatever Sargon said that triggered you, was likely said specifically to be thought-provoking. Can't tell from your partial paraphrase what exactly you're referring to, though.
@JB-ti7bl You could of course google the quote and see that he ingratiated himself to paedophile Amos Yee but I realise this is beyond the faculties of the Rubin audience and certainly beyond that of a person who thinks Carl is remotely thoughtful.
You know he's a rapist and a Nazi... There might be no evidence for that claim but there are anonymous people willing to make statements to the press for money any time they are asked to.
Conservatives seem to me to be the party that can think 30 steps ahead because I recall all the conservatives literally predicting THIS future 20-30 years ago. I’m in a constant state of saying I TOLD YOU SO. To every liberal I’ve ever met. They argued with me… said I was ignorant, stupid, uneducated, unenlightened, backward, you name it. Only to fast forward and here we are.. in my PREDICTED future. To me it’s just common sense!
The "Liberal vs Conservative" dichotomy is stupid, nearly as stupid as "Left-vs-Right". Conservative is opposed by radical, ~not~ liberal. Liberal is opposed by asceticism, ~not~ conservatism. If this observation troubles you, best of luck to you with ever sorting out the rest :)
I'm a charter member of your 'Watcher on the Wall' club. I first saw the hijacking taking place with the Clintons and their circle. When Obama showed up, and Hillary called herself a Progressive, I began to write about it. Thanks for your work.
I also credit Carl for waking me up as well! I'll always remember and love his "this week in stupid" videos, and his feud with Anita Sarkeesian. Carl is an extremely knowledgeable person, I'm also a big fan of the lotus eaters podcast as well.
Carl destroyed my athiesm by espousing one of the best philosophical proofs for the fact that objective morality cannot be grounded outside a framework of God. I'm now back to the Church of my birth and happier than ever.
Carl thinks a prescription of liberalism is state intervention, someone doesn't know what Laissez-faire is and where it came from for all his reading his conclusions are shallow and defined by the last 10 years he "knows" very little
Maybe I'm a bit selfish with my Sargon but I've tried to watch the lotus eaters but the other hosts just don't stack up and I find myself getting bored.
@@ispep8882 I will say I don't like all the presenters on there, but I love Carl, Callum, Harry and Connor. The rest of them are pretty tepid for sure.
Though, being reasonable made he get destroyed in politics. Politicians need to sound "extreme" to gain momentum, so when their idea is discussed, they can reach a reasonable agreement.
Fruit on the tree, baby. Corruption doesn't creep into liberalism, it is inherent. It is inevitable. The issue is the essential self-centered/self-serving nature of the values driving it. Liberalism hates being "checked" and resists it violently. There is only transitory "unchecked liberalism." It's a values based process, not a state of being or 'position.' And the end of it is that the 0ther 1% which rules with an iron fist and fleeces every resource until there is nothing but death. Liberals love liberalism simply in the hopes that they will end up on top with their boot on the neck of everyone else around them.
Yeah it was truly then that you realized how the system would create and cover up stories (to what end?? Only Division and Power makes any sense). But he would show how Far(Left) Lunacy could produce mass hypnosis to the point where the Bad Guys were openly rigging the system and most people had no clue.
Sargon is switching between the American and European definitions of liberalism, which is weird, because Dave often identifies as classical liberal (a.k.a. libertarian). Of course these are "incomplete philosophies"--they are just political philosophies, about permissible action. That's plenty contentious enough. Other branches of philosophy, e.g. theories of the good life, are covered elsewhere.
@@gridley There's nothing common about sense any longer, ethics is how we got climate decrees and integrity is a South Park sketch. It's not cavalier decision making, so much as Roundhead autocracy in the form of Globalism that's created such a contentious environment of division so as to usurp our traditions, values and principles. They killed kings, and now they're after the wealthy and the poor alike.
The way out of it REQUIRES the same approach as the *_GORDIAN KNOT_* ... and maybe people should read Robert Heinlein's novel *"Starship Troopers"* (read the novel/listen to the audiobook, the movie isnt detailed enough).
@@simplulo yes, this flaw in his thinking was adopted from these "post-liberal" national conservatives (they're "post-liberal", and yet they named themselves after two concepts that originated in liberalism: nationalism and conservatism). He said he "looked deeply into" liberalism and identified a flaw, but rather, he just went by Tweets from Auron MacIntyre and tried to pass it off as deep thinking (a usual flaw of his, he's extremely surface level in his understanding of ideas). Besides, this "problem" of the "incomplete philosophy" was solved by Edmund Burke in England, and later Russell Kirk in America. Liberalism is a theory of what ought to be legal. Conservatism includes this theory of what ought to be legal, but includes what is moral. Which is why conservatism is a liberal political ideology. In fact, a large point of why liberalism is essentially just a limitation of government power, is because the state has a means of getting in the way between individuals and their moral guiding institutions: the church, their community, their charities, their clubs and lodges. Don't look for your moral framework in political philosophy. Draw your political philosophy from your moral framework.
lol he would be far bigger if he didn’t decide to be a coward. The guy was one of the first, if not THE first anti woke RUclipsr. He started getting pushback and he backed off.
@@bhec7715 Maybe you are right, But I remember he went thru a lot of hell. And being the OG(at least the first really Big Common Sense Commentator on Social Media). Definitely means he was no weakling when he was taking the ball and running with it. Now if he fumbled it, he fumbled it. But whenever someone is willing to take on The System and eventually loses. I'm probably not going to call that man a Coward... Lucky to be Alive maybe, but definitely not a Coward.
@@bhec7715Used to listen to him a lot years ago, what do you mean a coward and backing off? He seems to be coming along pretty well, even though I have some fundamental disagreements with him. Trying to think what you are referring to, the Jess Philips thing, the race question, something else?
I am forever grateful to Saargon. He was the first pioneer to really begin to notice and deep dive into the craziness that began happening in America. I was lost and upset and he noticed what I was noticing and gave a lot of good information and deep dives. ♥️. Love him!
I was always a red pilled guy but Sargon’s first video on Laci Green is what introduced me into the digital world of anti establishment thought and led me to find figures like Lauren Southern and others so for that alone I’m extremely grateful
@@haycockjeff well she did tone it down with the ultra woke stuff when she was dating Chris Ray Gun Then they broke up and I never heard of her again 😂
Classical liberalism's flaw is that it tends not be willing to stand against those who would destroy it. "Liberal" professors 50 years ago, welcomed Leftist into their ranks on the grounds of respect for all viewpoints and then those classical liberals were summarily overrun by the Leftist who are not going to make the mistake of hiring true liberals again.
While democracy is the rule of the majority over the minority. Liberal democracy with its focus on individual rights can be seen to some extent as rule of the minority over the majority
Not "a flaw of classical liberalism." ...What you named is a flaw of low-quality classical liberals. (The political philosophy of classical liberalism has self-defense built into it. Indeed, it arose as a coherent political philosophy of self-defense.) Why are they (U.S. classical liberals) low quality? Why didn't they resist the Frankfurt School Marxists' takeover of Academia? Because their great grandparents capitulated to the Prussian education model in 1852(MA) and the rest of then-existing states by 1900(VT). By 1900, "The American Educator"(Taylorville, Illinois) and similar socialist periodicals were indoctring a new generation of "socialist central bank plantation chattel." (A kind of human farm chattel whose intellectual defenses are ill-equipped to resist parasitism at all hierarchical levels.) The Prussian education model created low-enough-quality Germans by 1932 to utterly destroy Germany in 13 years. By 1938, the year of Kristallnacht, Germany had had 170 years of the Prussian model of education. In 2022, the USA will have had the same amount of "progressive" programming. Teachers always claim that coercive taxation is "progress" and seek to expand it, due to nothing more complex than narrow self-interest. This legal conflict of interest is reflected in the biological world by parasitic evolutionary selection pressures.
I'd expand on this, its flaw is what Carl mentioned. Its not a complete philosophy on life which means it'll always be a sister philosophy to other ideas. Modern liberalism around 1900 started to become more libertarian through various means. WWII and the red scare in particular pushed a form of liberalism where the ideal was a strictly rational pop with elites guiding based on revealed preferences. This lead to the pop becoming more focused on education, production, and consumption with a smaller focus on sentimental bonds such as family and religion. This is where getting religion and classic works out of school became popular. All of this left a huge vacuum for daily life philosophy by a frankly spiritually uneducated pop. The whole culture war is a spiritual war of groups organizing to push what daily meta physical ideas should take over the missing norm
Irresponsibility is rampant in government and cuts through "both sides of the aisle". It fluctuates; democrats have been getting their way more often lately.
The Lotus Eaters is a fantastic channel. I came across Carl a few years back. He along with others opened my mind to many different ideas that has fundamentally changed me.
@@doe729 Callum has deserted his family he has a wife and children in Stockport he just got up and left to go galavanting with sargon Callum's oldest son James asks where Callum (Dad) is everyday his mother is running out of excuses please Callum if you're reading this just pick up the phone this Christmas 😢
I find it both hopeful and depressing that some random guy has become a more serious moral philosopher than a large chunk of academia. Good on you Carl.
I don’t know if Carl will ever truly understand just how much of an impact he has made on people and especially young men. I began watching him back in 2014-2015. He helped to mold me into the strong conservative man that I have grown into along with various other voices such as Steven Crowder, the daily wire hosts, and so many other people. I have nothing but respect for this man and owe him and many others a debt of gratitude.
He was pretty much the first normal person I ever listened too when I started getting into politics. First it was Alex Jones, but Carl was the voice of normality to me. His progression has been awesome to watch, especially as I've grown to view conservative views as more sensible than I used too.
Carl thinks a prescription of liberalism is state intervention, someone doesn't know what Laissez-faire is and where it came from he hardly knows what he's talking about
@@ScreamingSturmovikwouldn’t laissez faire be free market capitalism? Totally unchecked and unregulated economy, governed by those that own the land, wealth and therefore production, and at a stretch the people too?
@@Messy6610 just because it's known for being applied to economics doesn't mean it can't (or wasn't) applied as a general policy my point was that Carl was connecting "liberalism" with state welfare programs when that wasn't common until around the end of the 19th century and prior to that the church basically had a monopoly on charity/welfare
@@ScreamingSturmovik when and where was it prescribed or applied as a general policy? I’m genuinely interested. The Victorian era in Britain is somewhat similar I imagine. As industry and manufacturing for example were allowed many freedoms to expand and capitalised upon the growing population to keep wages low and profits high. However this was followed by ww1 which sadly yet most surely balanced the scales. Feudal societies too no doubt had similarities, however while the church had a monopoly on charity even then, it was a Lords responsibility to protect and nurture their vassals. Though a “bad” Lord as I’m sure there were many would eventually be cast down, and vice versa for the “bad” Kings, not a perfect but a system none the less. The church may well have been the symbol of charity but was also a brick in the wall of the state and state power. King, parliament and church, monarchy, the people and God. Less so these days, and possibly we are worser off for it. I’m not religious but I did see the advantages of having a balance of power. Personally I think the best course is balance. Between powers, the people and the economy. When one grows too powerful the rest suffer, corruption runs rampant. As today it is corporations that have grown beyond the power of the state that seems to be society’s problem, compounded by globalisation and. With the ruling class either chasing after with a begging bowl, while bleeding the individual for every penny. Or being party to the corporate establishment. While social welfare and social funding, at least in the uk is around a third of spending, it is how the spending is allocated, wasted or simply siphoned to someone’s back pocket that bothers me. As for Carl he like myself is more a classical liberal, not a liberal in the American sense of the word, worth to recognise that liberty, liberal and freedom are relative words. I’m not sure if his stance has changed much, mine is shifting depending upon where the Overton window goes, I’m not in favour of the constant shift to the left by western society and I’m also not in favour of a large shift right. I like freedom but also balances, checks and accountability. I also don’t like hypocrisy, cultural deconstruction, moral ambiguity or bigotry. Sorry for the length of this just thought I’d share a few thoughts.
@@ScreamingSturmovik I just looked it up, it was only briefly applied to grain sales in France and when the crop yield was poor one year it was revoked, due to the price of bread being unaffordable and the cause of mass starvation. It was flirted with by many different forms of liberalism across Europe, the U.S and The Ottoman Empire but never really tried again. While classical liberal writers and politicians used the phrase it never was used in the true sense. It is effectively free market capitalism. Which I would argue against in its extreme, however I don’t like government having its hand so deeply in our lives. As I said before a balanced approach is preferable and likely beneficial.
I realized a few years ago that they're not stupid, they're lying. It's a hard pill to swallow but they know it's not about civil rights anymore, it's about Authoritarianism. And yes, that includes the people you love.
Kudos to all on the Rubin team for the amazing set and environment you've created. It really draws a person in. Unlike the tones of most shows and studios, the warm colors and glow are very inviting. I think you are on to something here! Great interview.
That was a great articulation of the problem, and goes along with the concept of "borrowed capital", where society has rejected the precepts that have allowed it to prosper without understanding how they helped to get us here and yet are baffled to see it all fall apart around us.
@@scatton61 Him pounding his fist onto his desk making his shitty ass audio go haywire while he cussed the shit out of Anita Sarkeesian or Franchesca Ramsey was peak Sargon. He'd chew them rotten ass women a new asshole in his typical intellectual beatdown style and I'd fucking damn near die laughing. Man I miss that stuff. Career wise he's made it far enough now that we'll probably never get to see that dog in him come out again. Kinda sad tbh. 😔
Liberalism was developed in a time when Christianity prospers. Where liberalism is what enables the best to rise to the top, Christianity (and to a greater or lesser extent other religions and forms of faith) is what drives people to pursue the moral virtues necessary for Liberalism to work.
I live in Swindon and bumped into Carl walking to the train station. I wonder if his automatic reaction might have been to think I was going to abuse him (I’m a middle aged woman) but no, he got a big fan thumbs up from me 👍
Sadly I had to visit Swindon this year. I didn't meet any Lotus eaters and have a trauma response to traffic lights now. It wasn't as dreary as I expected though.
@@tillbot8He was very nice. I bumped into Callum and the guys at the local pub too and they were all wonderful and mildly surprised someone in the pub recognised them and was a fan
@@zoeen5650 I moved to Swindon 20 years ago from Reading - and I’ve grown very fond of the place. Some of it is a bit ugly and run down but the people and the town are what I’d call hidden gems. In Reading there is a lot of problems with gangs and stuff, we haven’t had so much of that here and if there is a problem in Swindon it’s that Londoners and London overspillers are heading this way….
Correct, but the Right needs to be better at gatekeeping. For every Carl Benjamin, there are dozens of "the woke have gone too far" liberals, who switch sides and make the conservative case for transgenderism.
- I voted for Tony Blair twice, Nick Clegg then - gulp - Corbyn in 2017. I also voted Remain. To say I’ve been red-pilled is rather an understatement…..
@@evanm2024That’s one of the topics that ensures I can NEVER consider myself a liberal again. Liberalism to me meant ‘judge by character not by colour’, free speech, truth being more important than feelings, equality (not ‘equity’, science, reason, and yeah, the NHS and good, well run public services.
This guy was literally the OG of OG's of RUclips Common Sense Commentators. Dude was back there with the Scientist(Damn forget his name at this moment) who was kicked out of the so called OG Free Thought Blog..When he had a thought that wasn't the same as the Herd. He's a Legend and what's incredible about it is how it's because of how horrible the System is. He only became somebody because he could look at a situation and equate that 2+2=4 and not a 3 or 1 etc. Which is a gift most people have. I'm sure he looked at the Classified Documents of Shilery, Biden and Trump and thought. You can't go after one and ignore the other 2. But in this system. Yes you can. in this case 3 wrongs becomes 1 wrong and 2 right. Crazy Shite. P.S. "Thunderfoot" the Scientist.
I might have commented something similar on one of his Sargon vids back in the day. I came to recognise that liberalism made you susceptible to communist rhetoric, so had to be bolstered by a secondary ideology. You can want for people to choose their own direction in life, but that doesn't mean you can't encourage positive choices and discourage negative ones
When we discussed Karl Marx in High School Sociology, half the class and the teacher all agreed "This guy's worldview revolves around money", we could feel the greed beneath the message. Maybe religion didn't brainwash us at all if it taught us how to recognize bad intentions in people.
Well yes, marxists are completely materialistic. There is nothing transcendent in Marxist ideology. They seem to be aggressively allergic to the very concept of anything transcendental, I suspect for the reason that it's a realm they can't force their control over.
I think it was Sargon who first pointed me to you, Dave. I've always seen Carl as one of the most interesting and insightful voices on the internet. Good to see you both back opposite each other again.
Intellectuals thought we could reason to the metaphysics of Christianity and put us on this path. They jettisoned the faith and failed to realize that without it they couldn't even defend reason as something we could actually do.
It certainly explains how we can have people demanding that "their truth" be taken seriously and as valid as actual, factual truth. It's effectively made subjectivity the law of the land, but some peoples subjective opinion are more correct then someone else's.
I had exactly this discussion today. Somebody was trying to justify why we should give money to the poor. I said "Tell me how you are going to justify this to people with different world views. Christians believe that giving to the poor is a moral good, but object to being compelled by a third party to be charitable because it undermines the act of individual charity and the evangelical nature of Christian charity. Atheists believe they have one life, it has no purpose as such, and they believe all humans are bio-mechanical machines - why would they spend money on the poor instead of themselves?" He had nothing to say. Fact is that giving money to the poor was much easier to justify when we were all Christian. Taking out the metaphysical purpose to life by disputing religious belief has rendered all political philosophies simultaneously meaningless.
@@PGHEngineer It's always the government getting involved. For most things Jesus speaks about, there is to be no secular or otherwise force enforcing it. A really good example is what you mentioned is giving money to the poor. This is something you are judged on at the end of your life by God Himself, not a human institution while alive. If a voting body decides to increase taxes beyond a tenth of total increase, even for compassionate reasons, it's sin.
I... unknowing what was to come... was making the case that modern rationality would not exist without the heritage of the christian thinkers of the early church... way back in the late 1990s
8:35, such a good point from Carl. The happy society can only be if it finds a good way to steer between - conservative ideas (the ideas which conserve, stabilize, slow down changes, but also slow down trying out new stuff which can also be bad sometimes) & - progressive ideas (old is bad and we need to take chances and try out new stuff to move the society further) No extreme version of either of these 2 is good, but a balance, based on the honest and good faith discussion based on the current situation and what is best for the people is what we need to aim for. It should never be the goal to destroy one side and in order for the other one to have full control, that's dictatorship, that's 1984, that's 1930s Germany that's USSR that's communist China... A bad buch to be a member of... When that is the goal we have already failed as living beings living on this earth in peace and being free. go Carl, go Dave, good talk :)
I remember Jordan Peterson giving this exact same argument/explanation years ago (nothing wrong with Carl saying the same thing, he may have come to the same conclusion independantly). And it makes perfect sense. This is my political stance: whichever side is getting too much control and thus going too far, i support and promote the other side. Its all about balance. having both sides of the political spectrum is not just desirable, but neccessarry (i think thats almost a word for word quote from JBP).
This issue with moving further away from a system with “limited and enumerated powers” is the easiest way to defeat an incumbent is just to promise more stuff at everyone else’s expense. Just look at the left/establishment over the last 40 years specifically, every generation of liberal and/or establishment candidates promises more money, more control, more solutions at the expense of every increasing debt to the nation.
Freedom and prosperity is the result of hard work, self control and moral behavior. It isn’t just the result of being left alone by the government. Carl is correct.
Exactly! There is no freedom without morality. People who know themselves understand it on a personal level. All immorality, compulsions, addictions are making you a captive. Moral behavior is leading to the development of creative abilities and freedom and fulfillment. It is self-discipline that leads to positive growth and freedom. You can extrapolate all of that on the society at large.
I've been a fan of Carl ever since he was a waiter at applebees. It's good to see him enjoying the success he deserves while wearing the uniform that reminds him where it all started. Never forget where you came from.
I view Liberalism like desert. So conservativism is the meal. If we ate nothing but desert all day everyday, we would get sick & die. But it's nice to celebrate a success with a nice desert every once in awhile. It does the heart good & makes us anxious to do it again, for the right reasons. Conservatism sustains us & keeps us healthy, without it we die.
Conservativism is also liberal. Is he anarchist? No.... is he fascist? No... he's a liberal. You see it didn't take him 10 years, he's just 10 years behind. He's now where I was in 2017ish when he was going against the "racists"
A big issue is in the corruption of our language. Lefties use liberalism to justify socialist and communist ideals, claiming that equity proceeds equality, and it's the government's job to level the field job(that's authoritarianism). While the Righties use the word liberal as a pejorative to demonize anything outside of traditionalists' values and Republican goals(another form of authoritarianism). I'll give some of these new Republicans credit, they have been more focused on the restoration of liberty and economic freedom than any other group in the last twenty or so years.
Yes! That's actually why I went back to religion. There are standards I found myself craving. Now my standards are literally set in stone and I don't worry about allowing myself to be so open minded that my brain falls out. Yet I still can be understanding, gentle, and empathetic.
We’ve all had to grow in the last decade. I used to call myself a classical liberal, but it wasn’t enough. I’m a wiser conservative and Christian, and much happier for it.
Case and point: How many times in a day of serfing screwtube or rumble, do you see a republican mention conservativism? What we think the republican party is, is very different than what the people we are electing, thinks it is.
The first thing I learned is that liberals attack the person and do not critique the argument. The second thing I learned is that liberals make appeals to authority and not an argument. The last thing I learned is to avoid any thing resembling an intellectual discussion with a liberal for the minutes of our brief existence are precious to me. The deadly flaw of liberalism is that it denies the supremacy of the individual in the individuals right to decide for themselves.
People that judge the child or anyone else for getting attacked are truly messed up human beings. It’s baffling, but not, because we see all kinds of violent horrible behavior now days. What scares me is how “ normal” these people appear , your neighbor, check out person at your favorite store, teacher, student… There’s real sickness in the hearts of regular citizens going on so thinking being cool owning a pit is more important than the destruction and death they can unleash isn’t a good enough reason. Even with their own children!!!!! That part is unbelievable!!!!
This video has confirmed a thought that I've had for a long time, but never written down on any site. Why do you think the left has pushed traditional Liberals toward the Republicans and Conservative side of the political spectrum? My parents were very Conservative, but I was always more of a Libertarian. I see more and more people who I've always thought of as Liberals who now seem closer to Conservative. The left seems closer to actual Communists than ever in my lifetime. I understand that the people who were demonstrating outside the Democratic convention in 1968 took over the Democratic Party by 1972, but now it's getting really strange, if not ridiculous.
I think what happens is that Progressive politics comes in certain flavours, and any given flavour of Progressive politics will run out of steam eventually and Conservative politics eventually takes over. In the UK this process has been very obvious. Politics before 1945 was mostly between Conservative and Classical Liberals until the welfare state came into play and we got the welfare safety net and free health care which has been very popular - but it also screwed the Liberals because it was their last good, sellable idea. So then Socialism came into play on the progressive side and the sellable idea to the voters was that the private corporations were making huge profits and if these corporations were taken into public ownership it would liberate these profits for the people. Only by 1978 this was shown to be untrue - in fact the nationalised industries were losing huge amounts of money and the working class didn't get much benefit from it. So that killed Socialism and we ended up with 17 years of unbroken Conservative government. Then the Progressives came up with neo-Liberalism which was really a kind of pragmatic attempt to give people what they wanted as a partial representative democratic party, but they betrayed that thinking with the War on Iraq. Now the progressives have been out of power for another 13 years. Looks like the next flavour of Progressive politics would be "Just like the Conservatives, but with a different guy in front". Let's see. Seems to me that something similar happened to the Democrats during the Obama administration. They realised that the voters didn't like Obama as much as the DNC did. Then Obamacare was a failure. I think it was at this point they realised they had run out of sellable ideas. This then resulted in the longest negative campaign in history against Trump, because they don't actually have anything positive to sell. As the Liberals have run out of ideas within the Democrats, the hard left have run riot. That's where you are today. I remain optimistic about both the UK and USA because I see both countries as being on the brink of collapse of the left - and the left knows this which is why they appear to be setting the world on fire and getting hysterical. Well, wouldn't you if everything you ever believed in appeared to be dropping into a dark chasm never to rise again? Meanwhile more and more of the people that are the backbone of our nations are waking up from their deep sleep and realising that things need to change, they need to get serious, they need to pay attention.
His old stuff is still worth watching. His treatise on Britain ending the slave trade is a classic and there are LOTS of videos of people reacting to it too - he has educated many many people
"But what is liberty without wisdom, and without virtue? It is the greatest of all possible evils; for it is folly, vice, and madness, without tuition or restraint." ~Edmund Burke
The two biggest problems with liberalism are that they need a class of people to champion to feed their narcissism and the fact that in order to be a good liberal you have to be more extreme than other liberals to increase your worth. The main issues with the first problem is that eventually that class of people that they are continuously calling victims will not try as hard in life and fall behind and then get angry and violent. Creating generational poverty and suffering. The main problem with the second issue is that liberalism will always and inevitably lead to wokeness. The narcissist liberal has to receive more and more status among their peer group and therefore will have to be accepting of progressively more and more bad behavior. That will lead to the destruction of moral society and civilization.
nah, it's the Paradox of Tolerance. What you described above was a trending ( or a ..."Mao-ing", if you will) of those whom Marx identified as _the petty bourgeoisie._ They've always been 'the scheming, insufferable c*nts of the community ' which grow in number proportional to the fat of the land. Industrialization has enabled millions of them to reproduce, with some of the delayed consequences of their enormity only beginning to manifest recently.
Well said rob, I would add that both sides have there status gaming, but the right rewards come from hard work and meaning, far easer to scream and virtue signal, sad but true
As a voter in the 70s, I started as a conservative. To me, it was a clear choice, even then, between collectivism and individualism. I’m glad to see more people realizing the critical importance of the individual’s rights and the damage caused by the idea of giving up rights for the promise of security. We are ALL individuals. We just need more people to recognize the evil of mob rule and how easily “democracy” slips into the mob rule paradigm. And that this applies to government too.
Classical Liberalism is indeed, quite _intentionally_ , an incomplete philosophy. The reason is that it cannot dictate your religious values without becoming authoritarian. This is a feature, not a bug. It is completely true that if you don't fill in what is missing you aren't going to be happy, but the fact that it is yours to fill it is the best and most important feature of liberalism. This is not a flaw, unless you think it rejects religion, which it doesn't. The American founders even stated that you need something like Christianity (but not necessarily Christianity!) to fill your life out. It is up to you to do this.
What Benjamin is talking about is not just Liberalism, or to be more accurate Classical Liberalism, he is pointedly talking about pathological interactions with the State. A more refined version of Classical Liberalism -- Libertarianism -- addresses those problems effectively as well, while incorporating the social expectations of behavior and obligations. It is when the State gets involved in what is voluntary private interactions, is when it goes awry.
Earlier on in Carl's youtube heyday, I was still on the "left" but would listen to his criticisms for extra perspective. He's always been accused of being a right winger even when he was very clear he had liberal values, and it seemed to me that was true and he was upset with what "liberalism" had become. I feel like these days labels are more meaningless than ever, but people's morality and critical thinking skills are somehow becoming more and more apparent. Strange times. Stay critical my friends.
I’m glad you acknowledged that liberalism is an incomplete philosophy. Conservatism similarly lacks substance and is even less coherent. Objectivism is the only holistic and fully coherent philosophy that I’ve ever come across, and not enough people are familiar with it. Built atop Aristotle’s works on logic, and Bastiat’s take on political philosophy, Objectivism incorporates the best aspects of Liberal and Conservative principles and leaves out all the corrupting and diluting influences of mysticism and authoritarianism inherent in both. Everyone should do themselves a favour and become properly acquainted with Objectivist philosophy.
This is such a great point: our leaders cannot be relied upon and their decisions are shockingly cavalier, given their role and responsibility. It really is truly shocking when you think about it.
Watch Dave Rubin's FULL INTERVIEW with Carl Benjamin here: ruclips.net/video/92JuNDOx9sU/видео.html
What time was this interview? You appear to be having coffee and whiskey on the rocks. I enjoy both of those beverages, but not at the same time.
Carl Benjamin is one of the first people who made me more aware of what was happening with Feminism.
British state isn't oppressing Russell Brand. This was not a state made case either. Fat Benji lies every time he opens his mouth
Yes, the UKIP rape man who said "it depends on the child" is very much abreast of the contemporary discourse in feminism!
Yes.@@MrOttoMarrakech
Whatever Sargon said that triggered you, was likely said specifically to be thought-provoking. Can't tell from your partial paraphrase what exactly you're referring to, though.
@JB-ti7bl You could of course google the quote and see that he ingratiated himself to paedophile Amos Yee but I realise this is beyond the faculties of the Rubin audience and certainly beyond that of a person who thinks Carl is remotely thoughtful.
It really is no wonder they worked so hard at cancelling Carl. Thanks for having him on, Dave.
You know he's a rapist and a Nazi... There might be no evidence for that claim but there are anonymous people willing to make statements to the press for money any time they are asked to.
Liberalism is the result of child abuse. We have a party of abused children.
Yes thank you!
Haha dummy 😂😂
Conservatives seem to me to be the party that can think 30 steps ahead because I recall all the conservatives literally predicting THIS future 20-30 years ago. I’m in a constant state of saying I TOLD YOU SO. To every liberal I’ve ever met. They argued with me… said I was ignorant, stupid, uneducated, unenlightened, backward, you name it. Only to fast forward and here we are.. in my PREDICTED future. To me it’s just common sense!
Same here. It’s non-stop parade of “Oh look, I said that would happen and there it is!”; I hate being right about all this….
It is uncommon sense because a person having any sense is now uncommon.
The "Liberal vs Conservative" dichotomy is stupid, nearly as stupid as "Left-vs-Right".
Conservative is opposed by radical, ~not~ liberal.
Liberal is opposed by asceticism, ~not~ conservatism.
If this observation troubles you, best of luck to you with ever sorting out the rest :)
@@GloryCarrier22 But what did you do to try and stop it?
I'm a charter member of your 'Watcher on the Wall' club. I first saw the hijacking taking place with the Clintons and their circle. When Obama showed up, and Hillary called herself a Progressive, I began to write about it. Thanks for your work.
I also credit Carl for waking me up as well! I'll always remember and love his "this week in stupid" videos, and his feud with Anita Sarkeesian. Carl is an extremely knowledgeable person, I'm also a big fan of the lotus eaters podcast as well.
Carl destroyed my athiesm by espousing one of the best philosophical proofs for the fact that objective morality cannot be grounded outside a framework of God. I'm now back to the Church of my birth and happier than ever.
Carl thinks a prescription of liberalism is state intervention, someone doesn't know what Laissez-faire is and where it came from
for all his reading his conclusions are shallow and defined by the last 10 years he "knows" very little
Maybe I'm a bit selfish with my Sargon but I've tried to watch the lotus eaters but the other hosts just don't stack up and I find myself getting bored.
@@ispep8882 I will say I don't like all the presenters on there, but I love Carl, Callum, Harry and Connor. The rest of them are pretty tepid for sure.
@@FAFOistheLawI also miss John
Absolutely love Carl! He is intelligent, grounded and reasonable. Thanks for having him on!
Suppose I told you leftism was caused by child abuse. That it is full of abused children with too much anger. Would it make more sense?
Yes thanks?
For your stupid bullshit 😂
Though, being reasonable made he get destroyed in politics. Politicians need to sound "extreme" to gain momentum, so when their idea is discussed, they can reach a reasonable agreement.
This is the most articulate explanation I’ve ever heard describing how and why unchecked liberalism evolved to where we are today.
Fruit on the tree, baby. Corruption doesn't creep into liberalism, it is inherent. It is inevitable. The issue is the essential self-centered/self-serving nature of the values driving it.
Liberalism hates being "checked" and resists it violently. There is only transitory "unchecked liberalism." It's a values based process, not a state of being or 'position.' And the end of it is that the 0ther 1% which rules with an iron fist and fleeces every resource until there is nothing but death. Liberals love liberalism simply in the hopes that they will end up on top with their boot on the neck of everyone else around them.
he's brilliant. wait until you hear about Dadism
Oh he's far from the only one saying this. Look up Tom Holland for example.
It’s not unchecked liberalism.
It’s the subversion of liberalism.
You mean unchecked pseudo-liberalism? Why allow Marxists to define your terms? Cowardice? Stupidity? Weakness?
So glad to see Carl back on your show. Reminded of his enjoyable "This Week In Stupid" podcasts.
I miss those, kinda stopped watching him when he stopped making those.
I still miss them.
This is still a thing on the His Lotus Eaters site though it's daily!
Yeah it was truly then that you realized how the system would create and cover up stories (to what end?? Only Division and Power makes any sense). But he would show how Far(Left) Lunacy could produce mass hypnosis to the point where the Bad Guys were openly rigging the system and most people had no clue.
The series I miss the most is "All Cultures are Beautiful." It was a short, but great one.
Better Late then Never, but Now we're living in an increasing nightmare of Democrat policies.
Sargon is switching between the American and European definitions of liberalism, which is weird, because Dave often identifies as classical liberal (a.k.a. libertarian). Of course these are "incomplete philosophies"--they are just political philosophies, about permissible action. That's plenty contentious enough. Other branches of philosophy, e.g. theories of the good life, are covered elsewhere.
*In general, any ideology that isn't closely tied to honesty, common sense, ethics & integrity is very likely to go off the deep end.*
@@gridley There's nothing common about sense any longer, ethics is how we got climate decrees and integrity is a South Park sketch.
It's not cavalier decision making, so much as Roundhead autocracy in the form of Globalism that's created such a contentious environment of division so as to usurp our traditions, values and principles. They killed kings, and now they're after the wealthy and the poor alike.
The way out of it REQUIRES the same approach as the *_GORDIAN KNOT_* ... and maybe people should read Robert Heinlein's novel *"Starship Troopers"* (read the novel/listen to the audiobook, the movie isnt detailed enough).
@@simplulo yes, this flaw in his thinking was adopted from these "post-liberal" national conservatives (they're "post-liberal", and yet they named themselves after two concepts that originated in liberalism: nationalism and conservatism). He said he "looked deeply into" liberalism and identified a flaw, but rather, he just went by Tweets from Auron MacIntyre and tried to pass it off as deep thinking (a usual flaw of his, he's extremely surface level in his understanding of ideas).
Besides, this "problem" of the "incomplete philosophy" was solved by Edmund Burke in England, and later Russell Kirk in America. Liberalism is a theory of what ought to be legal. Conservatism includes this theory of what ought to be legal, but includes what is moral. Which is why conservatism is a liberal political ideology.
In fact, a large point of why liberalism is essentially just a limitation of government power, is because the state has a means of getting in the way between individuals and their moral guiding institutions: the church, their community, their charities, their clubs and lodges. Don't look for your moral framework in political philosophy. Draw your political philosophy from your moral framework.
Nice to see Carl Benjamin being recognised.
lol he would be far bigger if he didn’t decide to be a coward. The guy was one of the first, if not THE first anti woke RUclipsr. He started getting pushback and he backed off.
@@bhec7715 Maybe you are right, But I remember he went thru a lot of hell. And being the OG(at least the first really Big Common Sense Commentator on Social Media). Definitely means he was no weakling when he was taking the ball and running with it. Now if he fumbled it, he fumbled it. But whenever someone is willing to take on The System and eventually loses. I'm probably not going to call that man a Coward... Lucky to be Alive maybe, but definitely not a Coward.
@@bhec7715Used to listen to him a lot years ago, what do you mean a coward and backing off? He seems to be coming along pretty well, even though I have some fundamental disagreements with him. Trying to think what you are referring to, the Jess Philips thing, the race question, something else?
@@bhec7715
Backed off???
He was tossed away by the tech-overlords!
@@bhec7715 He hasn't really backed off. If you simply mean he is less edgy now, sure. He is middle aged with children. We can't all stay 20 forever.
I am forever grateful to Saargon. He was the first pioneer to really begin to notice and deep dive into the craziness that began happening in America. I was lost and upset and he noticed what I was noticing and gave a lot of good information and deep dives. ♥️. Love him!
I was always a red pilled guy but Sargon’s first video on Laci Green is what introduced me into the digital world of anti establishment thought and led me to find figures like Lauren Southern and others so for that alone I’m extremely grateful
Laci Green got red pulled in the end I think….
@@haycockjeff well she did tone it down with the ultra woke stuff when she was dating Chris Ray Gun
Then they broke up and I never heard of her again 😂
@@13StJimmy
Yeah I stopped after that. More interesting people took my attention…..still follow Lotus Eaters…..
Carl was one of the first people I started listening to when I started waking up in 2013. I still follow him. He makes sense wherever he goes.
Dave, you are a great interviewer. You allow the guest to speak uninterrupted, digest what they say and build from there. So rare. Thank you.
Classical liberalism's flaw is that it tends not be willing to stand against those who would destroy it. "Liberal" professors 50 years ago, welcomed Leftist into their ranks on the grounds of respect for all viewpoints and then those classical liberals were summarily overrun by the Leftist who are not going to make the mistake of hiring true liberals again.
While democracy is the rule of the majority over the minority. Liberal democracy with its focus on individual rights can be seen to some extent as rule of the minority over the majority
Precisely
Not "a flaw of classical liberalism." ...What you named is a flaw of low-quality classical liberals. (The political philosophy of classical liberalism has self-defense built into it. Indeed, it arose as a coherent political philosophy of self-defense.) Why are they (U.S. classical liberals) low quality? Why didn't they resist the Frankfurt School Marxists' takeover of Academia? Because their great grandparents capitulated to the Prussian education model in 1852(MA) and the rest of then-existing states by 1900(VT). By 1900, "The American Educator"(Taylorville, Illinois) and similar socialist periodicals were indoctring a new generation of "socialist central bank plantation chattel." (A kind of human farm chattel whose intellectual defenses are ill-equipped to resist parasitism at all hierarchical levels.)
The Prussian education model created low-enough-quality Germans by 1932 to utterly destroy Germany in 13 years. By 1938, the year of Kristallnacht, Germany had had 170 years of the Prussian model of education. In 2022, the USA will have had the same amount of "progressive" programming. Teachers always claim that coercive taxation is "progress" and seek to expand it, due to nothing more complex than narrow self-interest. This legal conflict of interest is reflected in the biological world by parasitic evolutionary selection pressures.
@@JakeWitmer How interesting.
I'd expand on this, its flaw is what Carl mentioned. Its not a complete philosophy on life which means it'll always be a sister philosophy to other ideas.
Modern liberalism around 1900 started to become more libertarian through various means. WWII and the red scare in particular pushed a form of liberalism where the ideal was a strictly rational pop with elites guiding based on revealed preferences. This lead to the pop becoming more focused on education, production, and consumption with a smaller focus on sentimental bonds such as family and religion. This is where getting religion and classic works out of school became popular.
All of this left a huge vacuum for daily life philosophy by a frankly spiritually uneducated pop. The whole culture war is a spiritual war of groups organizing to push what daily meta physical ideas should take over the missing norm
Imagine people pushing through their crazy schemes, yet take no responsibility for the damage they cause.
Irresponsibility is rampant in government and cuts through "both sides of the aisle". It fluctuates; democrats have been getting their way more often lately.
When their crazy schemes go wrong, it's obviously because Evil Republicans didn't agree to spend more money on them.
Because the individuals themselves no longer hold themselves accountable. The democrats entire narrative is based upon not taking responsibility.
Thomas Sowell precept definitely.
@shaft9000 the politicians on the right have moved to far left with out of control spending.
The Lotus Eaters is a fantastic channel. I came across Carl a few years back. He along with others opened my mind to many different ideas that has fundamentally changed me.
Wait till you find out about James Lindsay.
Callum is more beast than man we want him to come back to his family
@@mayanboricua James is great. He is another one who I have gained much knowledge from.
@@RickTheBoss98 I think Callum is great.
@@doe729 Callum has deserted his family he has a wife and children in Stockport he just got up and left to go galavanting with sargon Callum's oldest son James asks where Callum (Dad) is everyday his mother is running out of excuses please Callum if you're reading this just pick up the phone this Christmas 😢
I find it both hopeful and depressing that some random guy has become a more serious moral philosopher than a large chunk of academia. Good on you Carl.
Lol.
because he is not constrained by group think and can think critically
I don’t know if Carl will ever truly understand just how much of an impact he has made on people and especially young men. I began watching him back in 2014-2015. He helped to mold me into the strong conservative man that I have grown into along with various other voices such as Steven Crowder, the daily wire hosts, and so many other people. I have nothing but respect for this man and owe him and many others a debt of gratitude.
He was pretty much the first normal person I ever listened too when I started getting into politics. First it was Alex Jones, but Carl was the voice of normality to me.
His progression has been awesome to watch, especially as I've grown to view conservative views as more sensible than I used too.
Being molded by likes of Crowder sounds like a rather tragic existence. Hope you'll get better.
Carl Benjamin was a pioneer in the culture war.. going back almost 10 years ago
This was a great discussion. Many people would benefit from hearing this. Carl’s insights were sound and vitally important.
Carl thinks a prescription of liberalism is state intervention, someone doesn't know what Laissez-faire is and where it came from
he hardly knows what he's talking about
@@ScreamingSturmovikwouldn’t laissez faire be free market capitalism? Totally unchecked and unregulated economy, governed by those that own the land, wealth and therefore production, and at a stretch the people too?
@@Messy6610 just because it's known for being applied to economics doesn't mean it can't (or wasn't) applied as a general policy
my point was that Carl was connecting "liberalism" with state welfare programs when that wasn't common until around the end of the 19th century and prior to that the church basically had a monopoly on charity/welfare
@@ScreamingSturmovik when and where was it prescribed or applied as a general policy? I’m genuinely interested. The Victorian era in Britain is somewhat similar I imagine. As industry and manufacturing for example were allowed many freedoms to expand and capitalised upon the growing population to keep wages low and profits high. However this was followed by ww1 which sadly yet most surely balanced the scales. Feudal societies too no doubt had similarities, however while the church had a monopoly on charity even then, it was a Lords responsibility to protect and nurture their vassals. Though a “bad” Lord as I’m sure there were many would eventually be cast down, and vice versa for the “bad” Kings, not a perfect but a system none the less. The church may well have been the symbol of charity but was also a brick in the wall of the state and state power. King, parliament and church, monarchy, the people and God. Less so these days, and possibly we are worser off for it. I’m not religious but I did see the advantages of having a balance of power.
Personally I think the best course is balance. Between powers, the people and the economy. When one grows too powerful the rest suffer, corruption runs rampant. As today it is corporations that have grown beyond the power of the state that seems to be society’s problem, compounded by globalisation and. With the ruling class either chasing after with a begging bowl, while bleeding the individual for every penny. Or being party to the corporate establishment. While social welfare and social funding, at least in the uk is around a third of spending, it is how the spending is allocated, wasted or simply siphoned to someone’s back pocket that bothers me. As for Carl he like myself is more a classical liberal, not a liberal in the American sense of the word, worth to recognise that liberty, liberal and freedom are relative words. I’m not sure if his stance has changed much, mine is shifting depending upon where the Overton window goes, I’m not in favour of the constant shift to the left by western society and I’m also not in favour of a large shift right. I like freedom but also balances, checks and accountability. I also don’t like hypocrisy, cultural deconstruction, moral ambiguity or bigotry. Sorry for the length of this just thought I’d share a few thoughts.
@@ScreamingSturmovik I just looked it up, it was only briefly applied to grain sales in France and when the crop yield was poor one year it was revoked, due to the price of bread being unaffordable and the cause of mass starvation. It was flirted with by many different forms of liberalism across Europe, the U.S and The Ottoman Empire but never really tried again. While classical liberal writers and politicians used the phrase it never was used in the true sense. It is effectively free market capitalism. Which I would argue against in its extreme, however I don’t like government having its hand so deeply in our lives. As I said before a balanced approach is preferable and likely beneficial.
So glad to see in studio interviews again! This is why I started watching Dave and I hope there is MUCH more of this soon.
Love Carl. Glad to see him on.
I realized a few years ago that they're not stupid, they're lying. It's a hard pill to swallow but they know it's not about civil rights anymore, it's about Authoritarianism. And yes, that includes the people you love.
Kudos to all on the Rubin team for the amazing set and environment you've created. It really draws a person in. Unlike the tones of most shows and studios, the warm colors and glow are very inviting. I think you are on to something here! Great interview.
Yeah! Good observation!
Saying in my family, "If you don't look back at your self 10 years ago and say, man I was an idiot. Then you haven't learned anything in 10 years."
yup
I so want to see more of this conversation.
That was a great articulation of the problem, and goes along with the concept of "borrowed capital", where society has rejected the precepts that have allowed it to prosper without understanding how they helped to get us here and yet are baffled to see it all fall apart around us.
I've been watching Sargon since he had just the one channel and it had somewhere between 12,000-20,000 subs and shitty audio. Good times. 😅
Yeah crappy mic, but the swearing was more entertaining ;-)
2k subbed his boomer audio was my muse.
@@scatton61 Him pounding his fist onto his desk making his shitty ass audio go haywire while he cussed the shit out of Anita Sarkeesian or Franchesca Ramsey was peak Sargon. He'd chew them rotten ass women a new asshole in his typical intellectual beatdown style and I'd fucking damn near die laughing. Man I miss that stuff. Career wise he's made it far enough now that we'll probably never get to see that dog in him come out again. Kinda sad tbh. 😔
I remeber chonky sargon from his first interview with Crowder, he has lost a ton of weight since then
Liberalism was developed in a time when Christianity prospers. Where liberalism is what enables the best to rise to the top, Christianity (and to a greater or lesser extent other religions and forms of faith) is what drives people to pursue the moral virtues necessary for Liberalism to work.
What about Islam ? That's so progressive . Not .
Islam?
Don't agree with other religions. You don't get Liberalism out of any other religion. Well, actually one exception Daoism.
Is Lame Is mainly about major and minor holes.
It's actually crazy how many people Carl has influenced over the years
Read Thomas Sowell. He articulates it all so completely.
Thomas Sewell comes to mind as a conservative social commentator/philosopher! His takes are priceless.
Shout out to Dave for giving Sargon his flowers , Carls cheeky grin as he thanks Dave says it all :)
So much of the irresponsibility of decision makers lies in their fractured families/ lack of children.
There arent many OGs left from 2014/2015 and Carl is one of the greatest
Who else? Thunderfoot? I wanna revisit them
I live in Swindon and bumped into Carl walking to the train station. I wonder if his automatic reaction might have been to think I was going to abuse him (I’m a middle aged woman) but no, he got a big fan thumbs up from me 👍
Did he react?
Sadly I had to visit Swindon this year. I didn't meet any Lotus eaters and have a trauma response to traffic lights now. It wasn't as dreary as I expected though.
@@tillbot8He was very nice. I bumped into Callum and the guys at the local pub too and they were all wonderful and mildly surprised someone in the pub recognised them and was a fan
@@zoeen5650 I moved to Swindon 20 years ago from Reading - and I’ve grown very fond of the place. Some of it is a bit ugly and run down but the people and the town are what I’d call hidden gems. In Reading there is a lot of problems with gangs and stuff, we haven’t had so much of that here and if there is a problem in Swindon it’s that Londoners and London overspillers are heading this way….
@@mogznwaz They do seem like lovely blokes, I get the impression Conor maybe a little standoffish tho, hope i'm wrong
Love to see you visiting Mr Rubin💗 Did you know Callum is misbehaving here 😂
Ooh, Dave getting back to 1-on-1 interviews. Love it!
It was fun watching Carl go slowly more and more rightward. But the difference is we on the right were welcoming. 😐
Correct, but the Right needs to be better at gatekeeping. For every Carl Benjamin, there are dozens of "the woke have gone too far" liberals, who switch sides and make the conservative case for transgenderism.
- I voted for Tony Blair twice, Nick Clegg then - gulp - Corbyn in 2017. I also voted Remain.
To say I’ve been red-pilled is rather an understatement…..
@@evanm2024That’s one of the topics that ensures I can NEVER consider myself a liberal again. Liberalism to me meant ‘judge by character not by colour’, free speech, truth being more important than feelings, equality (not ‘equity’, science, reason, and yeah, the NHS and good, well run public services.
Welcome back to the real world! I mean that in a nice way! :-) @@mogznwaz
@@mogznwaz Same here, I used to vote for Labour and the Greens in NZ. Never again.
This guy was literally the OG of OG's of RUclips Common Sense Commentators.
Dude was back there with the Scientist(Damn forget his name at this moment) who was kicked out of the so called OG Free Thought Blog..When he had a thought that wasn't the same as the Herd.
He's a Legend and what's incredible about it is how it's because of how horrible the System is. He only became somebody because he could look at a situation and equate that 2+2=4 and not a 3 or 1 etc. Which is a gift most people have.
I'm sure he looked at the Classified Documents of Shilery, Biden and Trump and thought. You can't go after one and ignore the other 2. But in this system. Yes you can. in this case 3 wrongs becomes 1 wrong and 2 right. Crazy Shite.
P.S. "Thunderfoot" the Scientist.
Wow, I forgot all about Thunderfoot! Blast from the past!
The mob comes for Carl, he reinvents himselfs as the lotus eaters. And now they come again. Go Carl.
I might have commented something similar on one of his Sargon vids back in the day.
I came to recognise that liberalism made you susceptible to communist rhetoric, so had to be bolstered by a secondary ideology.
You can want for people to choose their own direction in life, but that doesn't mean you can't encourage positive choices and discourage negative ones
Hey, two of the guys who really awakened my interest in what was happening in the world, together in one spot. Nice to see.
When we discussed Karl Marx in High School Sociology, half the class and the teacher all agreed "This guy's worldview revolves around money", we could feel the greed beneath the message. Maybe religion didn't brainwash us at all if it taught us how to recognize bad intentions in people.
Well yes, marxists are completely materialistic. There is nothing transcendent in Marxist ideology. They seem to be aggressively allergic to the very concept of anything transcendental, I suspect for the reason that it's a realm they can't force their control over.
I think it was Sargon who first pointed me to you, Dave. I've always seen Carl as one of the most interesting and insightful voices on the internet. Good to see you both back opposite each other again.
Sargon was the first one to wake me up to where society was being pushed with feminism at the tip of the spear.
Intellectuals thought we could reason to the metaphysics of Christianity and put us on this path. They jettisoned the faith and failed to realize that without it they couldn't even defend reason as something we could actually do.
It certainly explains how we can have people demanding that "their truth" be taken seriously and as valid as actual, factual truth. It's effectively made subjectivity the law of the land, but some peoples subjective opinion are more correct then someone else's.
I had exactly this discussion today. Somebody was trying to justify why we should give money to the poor. I said "Tell me how you are going to justify this to people with different world views. Christians believe that giving to the poor is a moral good, but object to being compelled by a third party to be charitable because it undermines the act of individual charity and the evangelical nature of Christian charity. Atheists believe they have one life, it has no purpose as such, and they believe all humans are bio-mechanical machines - why would they spend money on the poor instead of themselves?"
He had nothing to say. Fact is that giving money to the poor was much easier to justify when we were all Christian. Taking out the metaphysical purpose to life by disputing religious belief has rendered all political philosophies simultaneously meaningless.
@@PGHEngineer It's always the government getting involved. For most things Jesus speaks about, there is to be no secular or otherwise force enforcing it. A really good example is what you mentioned is giving money to the poor. This is something you are judged on at the end of your life by God Himself, not a human institution while alive. If a voting body decides to increase taxes beyond a tenth of total increase, even for compassionate reasons, it's sin.
I... unknowing what was to come... was making the case that modern rationality would not exist without the heritage of the christian thinkers of the early church... way back in the late 1990s
@@PGHEngineeror Buddhist. Cos karma comes around hahahaha
8:35, such a good point from Carl.
The happy society can only be if it finds a good way to steer between
- conservative ideas (the ideas which conserve, stabilize, slow down changes, but also slow down trying out new stuff which can also be bad sometimes) &
- progressive ideas (old is bad and we need to take chances and try out new stuff to move the society further)
No extreme version of either of these 2 is good, but a balance, based on the honest and good faith discussion based on the current situation and what is best for the people is what we need to aim for.
It should never be the goal to destroy one side and in order for the other one to have full control, that's dictatorship, that's 1984, that's 1930s Germany that's USSR that's communist China... A bad buch to be a member of... When that is the goal we have already failed as living beings living on this earth in peace and being free.
go Carl, go Dave, good talk :)
I remember Jordan Peterson giving this exact same argument/explanation years ago (nothing wrong with Carl saying the same thing, he may have come to the same conclusion independantly). And it makes perfect sense. This is my political stance: whichever side is getting too much control and thus going too far, i support and promote the other side. Its all about balance. having both sides of the political spectrum is not just desirable, but neccessarry (i think thats almost a word for word quote from JBP).
Carl helped me leave the Left back in his early days. He is very intelligent.
This issue with moving further away from a system with “limited and enumerated powers” is the easiest way to defeat an incumbent is just to promise more stuff at everyone else’s expense.
Just look at the left/establishment over the last 40 years specifically, every generation of liberal and/or establishment candidates promises more money, more control, more solutions at the expense of every increasing debt to the nation.
Freedom and prosperity is the result of hard work, self control and moral behavior. It isn’t just the result of being left alone by the government. Carl is correct.
Exactly! There is no freedom without morality. People who know themselves understand it on a personal level. All immorality, compulsions, addictions are making you a captive. Moral behavior is leading to the development of creative abilities and freedom and fulfillment.
It is self-discipline that leads to positive growth and freedom.
You can extrapolate all of that on the society at large.
Love it, Dave. A brilliant guest.
I've been a fan of Carl ever since he was a waiter at applebees. It's good to see him enjoying the success he deserves while wearing the uniform that reminds him where it all started. Never forget where you came from.
the left made a bitter enemy the day they started messing with Carls vidyagames... shoulda left em alone... ;)
I view Liberalism like desert. So conservativism is the meal. If we ate nothing but desert all day everyday, we would get sick & die. But it's nice to celebrate a success with a nice desert every once in awhile. It does the heart good & makes us anxious to do it again, for the right reasons. Conservatism sustains us & keeps us healthy, without it we die.
You mean ‘dessert’. Eating desert is more like eating the dry hinterlands of leftism LOL
Only took him 10 years. Good job, Sargon, happy to welcome you into conservatism.
Conservativism is also liberal. Is he anarchist? No.... is he fascist? No... he's a liberal.
You see it didn't take him 10 years, he's just 10 years behind. He's now where I was in 2017ish when he was going against the "racists"
Conservatism is literally the ideology of losing slowly. It’s an ideology for old men and fools. If we want to win we need to be more radical.
The man who originally took me down the rabbit hole. Great for this meeting to finally happen.
A big issue is in the corruption of our language. Lefties use liberalism to justify socialist and communist ideals, claiming that equity proceeds equality, and it's the government's job to level the field job(that's authoritarianism). While the Righties use the word liberal as a pejorative to demonize anything outside of traditionalists' values and Republican goals(another form of authoritarianism). I'll give some of these new Republicans credit, they have been more focused on the restoration of liberty and economic freedom than any other group in the last twenty or so years.
Wow Dave, studio is beautiful👍 Home run for your team.
Also great guest.
The entire problem with Liberal-ism is that it has ENTIRELY lacked ANY limiting principles to guide it.
well said!
metaphysically speaking it places itself above the one, or as the one
that is why they have no wisdom
Yes! That's actually why I went back to religion. There are standards I found myself craving. Now my standards are literally set in stone and I don't worry about allowing myself to be so open minded that my brain falls out. Yet I still can be understanding, gentle, and empathetic.
I like the look of the new studio.
Been many examples on how irresponsible academics cause hell on earth.
Good to see Rubin return to interviews
Carl really breaks it down. Good man.
I look forward to the full interview
Carl is one of the greatest thinkers of our time.
We’ve all had to grow in the last decade. I used to call myself a classical liberal, but it wasn’t enough. I’m a wiser conservative and Christian, and much happier for it.
Case and point: How many times in a day of serfing screwtube or rumble, do you see a republican mention conservativism? What we think the republican party is, is very different than what the people we are electing, thinks it is.
The first thing I learned is that liberals attack the person and do not critique the argument. The second thing I learned is that liberals make appeals to authority and not an argument. The last thing I learned is to avoid any thing resembling an intellectual discussion with a liberal for the minutes of our brief existence are precious to me. The deadly flaw of liberalism is that it denies the supremacy of the individual in the individuals right to decide for themselves.
Carlgon of Benkkad finally on the show, nice
Benjakkad?
People that judge the child or anyone else for getting attacked are truly messed up human beings. It’s baffling, but not, because we see all kinds of violent horrible behavior now days. What scares me is how “ normal” these people appear , your neighbor, check out person at your favorite store, teacher, student… There’s real sickness in the hearts of regular citizens going on so thinking being cool owning a pit is more important than the destruction and death they can unleash isn’t a good enough reason. Even with their own children!!!!! That part is unbelievable!!!!
This video has confirmed a thought that I've had for a long time, but never written down on any site. Why do you think the left has pushed traditional Liberals toward the Republicans and Conservative side of the political spectrum? My parents were very Conservative, but I was always more of a Libertarian. I see more and more people who I've always thought of as Liberals who now seem closer to Conservative. The left seems closer to actual Communists than ever in my lifetime. I understand that the people who were demonstrating outside the Democratic convention in 1968 took over the Democratic Party by 1972, but now it's getting really strange, if not ridiculous.
I think what happens is that Progressive politics comes in certain flavours, and any given flavour of Progressive politics will run out of steam eventually and Conservative politics eventually takes over. In the UK this process has been very obvious. Politics before 1945 was mostly between Conservative and Classical Liberals until the welfare state came into play and we got the welfare safety net and free health care which has been very popular - but it also screwed the Liberals because it was their last good, sellable idea. So then Socialism came into play on the progressive side and the sellable idea to the voters was that the private corporations were making huge profits and if these corporations were taken into public ownership it would liberate these profits for the people. Only by 1978 this was shown to be untrue - in fact the nationalised industries were losing huge amounts of money and the working class didn't get much benefit from it. So that killed Socialism and we ended up with 17 years of unbroken Conservative government. Then the Progressives came up with neo-Liberalism which was really a kind of pragmatic attempt to give people what they wanted as a partial representative democratic party, but they betrayed that thinking with the War on Iraq. Now the progressives have been out of power for another 13 years. Looks like the next flavour of Progressive politics would be "Just like the Conservatives, but with a different guy in front". Let's see.
Seems to me that something similar happened to the Democrats during the Obama administration. They realised that the voters didn't like Obama as much as the DNC did. Then Obamacare was a failure. I think it was at this point they realised they had run out of sellable ideas. This then resulted in the longest negative campaign in history against Trump, because they don't actually have anything positive to sell. As the Liberals have run out of ideas within the Democrats, the hard left have run riot. That's where you are today.
I remain optimistic about both the UK and USA because I see both countries as being on the brink of collapse of the left - and the left knows this which is why they appear to be setting the world on fire and getting hysterical. Well, wouldn't you if everything you ever believed in appeared to be dropping into a dark chasm never to rise again? Meanwhile more and more of the people that are the backbone of our nations are waking up from their deep sleep and realising that things need to change, they need to get serious, they need to pay attention.
Carl's the politics of Starship Troopers is still his greatest video from any of his channels.
SARGON of AKKAD!!!!
Does he still have a RUclips channel?
Yes. Doesn't post there often.
He's on his podcast channel more. Lotus eaters if you're curious.
His old stuff is still worth watching. His treatise on Britain ending the slave trade is a classic and there are LOTS of videos of people reacting to it too - he has educated many many people
Hes doing a podcast called the Lotus Eaters these days...
"But what is liberty without wisdom, and without virtue? It is the greatest of all possible evils; for it is folly, vice, and madness, without tuition or restraint." ~Edmund Burke
The two biggest problems with liberalism are that they need a class of people to champion to feed their narcissism and the fact that in order to be a good liberal you have to be more extreme than other liberals to increase your worth. The main issues with the first problem is that eventually that class of people that they are continuously calling victims will not try as hard in life and fall behind and then get angry and violent. Creating generational poverty and suffering. The main problem with the second issue is that liberalism will always and inevitably lead to wokeness. The narcissist liberal has to receive more and more status among their peer group and therefore will have to be accepting of progressively more and more bad behavior. That will lead to the destruction of moral society and civilization.
The biggest problem of liberalism is that it means different things in the US and Europe.
nah, it's the Paradox of Tolerance.
What you described above was a trending ( or a ..."Mao-ing", if you will) of those whom Marx identified as _the petty bourgeoisie._ They've always been 'the scheming, insufferable c*nts of the community ' which grow in number proportional to the fat of the land. Industrialization has enabled millions of them to reproduce, with some of the delayed consequences of their enormity only beginning to manifest recently.
Well said rob, I would add that both sides have there status gaming, but the right rewards come from hard work and meaning, far easer to scream and virtue signal, sad but true
May I ask, are you familiar with the utility monster by Robert Nozick?
Love the new set and music!
As a voter in the 70s, I started as a conservative. To me, it was a clear choice, even then, between collectivism and individualism. I’m glad to see more people realizing the critical importance of the individual’s rights and the damage caused by the idea of giving up rights for the promise of security.
We are ALL individuals. We just need more people to recognize the evil of mob rule and how easily “democracy” slips into the mob rule paradigm. And that this applies to government too.
Two of my favorite people. Really hoping I get to meet them both one day.
Someday Dave will understand the damage he has done to the structure he depends on with his family.
Yes, I totally agree. Just wrong.(imo)
Great to see Carl on here. Lotus Eaters is worth checking in on if you don't know btw
❤
Classical Liberalism is indeed, quite _intentionally_ , an incomplete philosophy. The reason is that it cannot dictate your religious values without becoming authoritarian. This is a feature, not a bug. It is completely true that if you don't fill in what is missing you aren't going to be happy, but the fact that it is yours to fill it is the best and most important feature of liberalism. This is not a flaw, unless you think it rejects religion, which it doesn't. The American founders even stated that you need something like Christianity (but not necessarily Christianity!) to fill your life out. It is up to you to do this.
I used to consider myself just left of center, now I find myself solidly on the right because I'm sure not part of what liberalism has become.
What Benjamin is talking about is not just Liberalism, or to be more accurate Classical Liberalism, he is pointedly talking about pathological interactions with the State.
A more refined version of Classical Liberalism -- Libertarianism -- addresses those problems effectively as well, while incorporating the social expectations of behavior and obligations.
It is when the State gets involved in what is voluntary private interactions, is when it goes awry.
Fancy fellow
I owe This Week in Stupid (please bring it back) to my awakening to all this.
Holy shish that's a name I haven't heard in 10 years. Where has he been? Prison with the rest of the conservatives?
He's been doing his own thing for 10 years now. Has a podcast called the Lotus Eaters.
@@TheDandyMann And he ran for public office. That was a hell of a thing.
@@ivermec-tin666 yeah, 2018 was wild
Lotus Eaters look it up man, i've been engrossed in it for the past 2 years, fantastic content, great website!
@@ivermec-tin666 That was ballsy
Earlier on in Carl's youtube heyday, I was still on the "left" but would listen to his criticisms for extra perspective. He's always been accused of being a right winger even when he was very clear he had liberal values, and it seemed to me that was true and he was upset with what "liberalism" had become. I feel like these days labels are more meaningless than ever, but people's morality and critical thinking skills are somehow becoming more and more apparent. Strange times. Stay critical my friends.
Glad to see Carl getting recognition for his work.
Carl sitting there, front row to watch an Anita Sarkeesian panel and her losing her mind was one of the very best moments in all of Gamergate 😂
Thank God there are people like this.
I’m glad you acknowledged that liberalism is an incomplete philosophy. Conservatism similarly lacks substance and is even less coherent. Objectivism is the only holistic and fully coherent philosophy that I’ve ever come across, and not enough people are familiar with it. Built atop Aristotle’s works on logic, and Bastiat’s take on political philosophy, Objectivism incorporates the best aspects of Liberal and Conservative principles and leaves out all the corrupting and diluting influences of mysticism and authoritarianism inherent in both. Everyone should do themselves a favour and become properly acquainted with Objectivist philosophy.
This is such a great point: our leaders cannot be relied upon and their decisions are shockingly cavalier, given their role and responsibility. It really is truly shocking when you think about it.
An actual interview with Rubin? The original format that I subscribed for?!?!? 😱😱😱
I haven't heard from Carl Benjamin in years. Im now following him
The Lotus Eaters is a great company with great videos. Something for everyone.
Great interview. I wish it were longer.
Come back tomorrow.
Great conversation!