Update 13 - Another Vaush and Tim Pool Discussion
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 8 фев 2025
- The other day Tim, Charlie Kirk and Vaush had a discussion on a number of different topics. I watch a lot of Tim's material and am even a member on his website, however, I think he again didn't do a great job with Vaush. Here are just a few of my takes on this discussion and just a few of my opinions on what was wrong with it.
Video I'm referencing: • Timcast IRL - Charlie ...
Vaush Channel: / @vaush
I think Vaush had a point man.
Democracy at work sounds kind of good.
Just like democracy in society.
A quick google search reveals you are incorrect about the definition of socialism and its incompatibility with libertarianism. Socialism *can* mean government ownership over the means of production, but it can also mean community ownership not done through the state.
From Wikipedia: "Socialism is a political, social and economic philosophy encompassing a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership of the means of production... Social ownership can be public, collective, cooperative, or of equity...Socialists disagree on whether government, particularly existing government, is the correct vehicle for change"
From Encyclopedia Britannica: "[socialists] disagree among themselves with regard to two key points... On the centralist side are socialists who want to invest public control of property in some central authority, such as the state...Those in the decentralist camp believe that decisions about the use of public property and resources should be made at the local, or lowest-possible, level by the people who will be most directly affected by those decisions. This conflict has persisted throughout the history of socialism as a political movement."
From Meriam Webster: "any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods" (note: collective OR government ownership)
Vaush did not invent the idea of libertarian socialism himself, it has existed since the mid 19th century. Perhaps you have heard of Noam Chomsky, one of the most cited authors in American history and a self-professed libertarian socialist? Vaush was also correct when he said that libertarianism began as a left-leaning ideology. From the wikipedia page on libertarianism: "Libertarianism originated as a form of left-wing politics such as anti-authoritarian and anti-state socialists like anarchists, especially social anarchists, but more generally libertarian communists/Marxists and libertarian socialists."
Anyway, hope you do not interpret this comment as a smack-down but rather a chance to learn about an ideology you have never heard of. You may disagree with it entirely but it is definitely a real thing that Vaush did not make up.
You still fail at your explanation. Social ownership implies that society owns everything but in reality you'd need some sort of organization/government to manage all of that ownership. At this point you enter the realm of "Government ownership of the means of production". No matter how you slice it or play word games, you will still end up in the basic definition of socialism. Also, it appears we're going to need to redefine what "The Left" means as well, because they appear to be in support of large corporations, government propaganda outlets, racial discrimination, censorship and every other big government project gone wrong now.
It is honestly very difficult to keep up with the left because they have no real point other than to just disagree with the right. So whatever the right says or believes it is the left's job to disagree, no matter how stupid it makes them look. Also, just because some guy in the past defines something in a statement doesn't mean it makes sense. I appreciate the information but still don't see a way to rationalize it.
@@nizexlizzy You seem to throw any left wing action or idea under the definition of socialism. Socialism isn’t when AOC says something “woke” it’s the democratic ownership of the means of production. This can be done though the government but also can be done through entitles called worker cooperatives. Imagine a firms set up like there own mini democracy controlled by the workers. Worker cooperatives literally have nothing to do with big government idk how you keep associating the two.
@@mwscoot13 That is because you have never seen and never will see a system setup like you describe. The only people that think something like that will are people that have never started and run a business and therefore have zero knowledge on what it takes to be successful. You just want to take existing companies and make them employee owned and you have zero knowledge of this ever being successfully done. So yes, I block them all together because the only way you will get what you want is for the government to manage and enforce it and at that point you’re socialist and you just handed all the power to the government employees which will destroy everything.
@@nizexlizzy cooperatives already do exist and there are plenty of successful examples, such as ocean spray juices (farmer owned coop) or the mondragon cooperative in Spain. Please do some research before spouting moronic misinformation.
@@nizexlizzy and if the people vote to impose laws that require businesses to give employees the right of first refusal in order to buy out a company that is going to sell and make it a coop, you can whine about it but that’s a perfectly viable system brought about by legal means.
Gramps you don’t even know what socialism and libertarianism is
And in true form, another socialist with insults and no definitions of their own. Please correct me where I'm wrong instead of adding comments that provide no useful information themselves.
I find it funny the republicans say liberal debaters are mean so they shouldn’t talk to them but support trump the tough guy. That dosent even make sense
Nor does your comment. I've never seen a conservative that refused to debate a leftist because they were too mean. The only issue might be that the leftist isn't really interested in having a discussion but instead talks over everyone and acts in a way that there would be no point to attempting it. I'm open to talking to Vaush, but not sure how it would go in his realm. He seems more open to discussion when he's on timcast.
@@nizexlizzy the only reason Sam Seder isn’t debated is because they say he is too harsh.
@@nizexlizzy the right literally has trump who in his first debate was an embarrassment, nothing but over talking and yelling.
@@17thwboy Not sure how that says anything useful. I can’t stand Trump but he was all we have. The sad part for you is that someone like Trump was able to beat all of your candidates twice. We supported him not because he was awesome but because he was all we had and was far better than anyone you offered. I’m sure you are happy as can be with the bumbling idiot that occupies the White House but we’re watching our country burn each and every day.
The saddest part of all of this is that it will be you idiots screaming the loudest when it all falls apart. Too blind to see what is right in front of you.
@@nizexlizzy trump was a 1
term president in the middle of a pandemic, he obviously wasn’t that good of a choice. lol I mean the biggest social movement of the world happened under trump… buildings burned around the world under trumps America
. Idk how that could be Biden’s fault for stuff burning when he wasn’t president
You should have a discussion with Vaush. You seem intelligent and good faith, it would be a good talk.
Would love to but not really sure how to get in touch with him. I've tried sending email to an address he gave out a while back but I don't think he looks at it. Maybe one day. I'm also a nobody so he may not want to waste his time with me.
@@nizexlizzy Hmm. I know he used to speak a lot with randos but maybe since he's gotten bigger he just wants to talk with recognizable names now. Oh well, best of luck to you sir.
I’m totally a meat eating vegetarian.
A business ran that way would fold in no time in my opinion. It goes with the old saying Too many cooks in the kitchen.