What I got out of studying authoritarian thought reform tactics, the main thing is we're all wired to accept homogeneous moral frameworks. All 'brainwashing' does is rewire ones moral framework away from that of their traditional culture. Our traditional culture's moral framework looks to be a mix of old school John Locke, basic human rights/property rights, colloquially synonymous with God given rights, with a heaping dose of Christian moral assumptions. In some specific and substantial ways, our traditional culture is antithetical to the authoritarian thought reform tactics outlined in Robert Lifton's 8. As an example, the 1st amendment to the US constitution includes free speech and freedom of assembly. Compared to #1 of Lifton's 8, 'information milleu', includes censorship and control of association. Who hasn't said/thought, "how dare the state or anyone violate anothers basic human rights!" To a lot that might sound secular? As one appeals to some nameless, nebulous higher moral authority than the state or anyone, including oneself. In practice, our culture upheld basic human rights by giving the middle finger to any state authoritarianism deemed over the line of the state. That's probably the reason Yuri Besmenov said we could avoid 'ideological subversion' by holding to a belief in God. Imo, Kevin is unaware of our need to accept homogeneous moral frameworks and their power. It's powerful stuff in cults, even more powerful in culture. It is powerful, if a teacher in the 80s had asked me to read the works of Locke or JS Mill, it would have been a redundant exercise and I'd have reacted when done by saying "tell me some shit I don't already know."
I can't add much to what you've stated here, but after decades of searching for answers, I've arrived at the conclusion that ol' Yuri really was on to something. It seems inevitable that godless people end up going to bad places. People really do need to revere and worship something higher than ourselves.
@kadams4458 I could add a few things... The anti authoritarian nature of our traditional moral framework, allows the pareto principle in economics to work its magic. We get massively more done through volutary cooperation, resulting in an insane abundance of everything dirt cheap. We get insane scientific, medical and technological advances... vs the Lysenkoism we get currently under authoritarians. We also have an easy argument for a justification to silence marxists. Free speech being under the umbrella of old school basic human rights/property rights is the reason liable, slander incitement to violence are punishable due to any monetary loss. Aka, a violation of property rights. Speech promoting marxism is by the very goal of marxism, promoting the loss of property rights. We just need a spine to enforce it. "Liberalism" and the personal responsibility that comes with Christian moral assumptions has accomplished some fantastic, mind boggling advances. Marxist authoritarians are delusional af for suggesting otherwise and we have the justification to shut them up.
Reminds me of John Lydon's a.k.a Johnny Rotten's recent comment that if you told him the it would be conservatives protecting freedom of expression, And Not the Liberals, he would never have believed you back in the 80-90's.
@@kadams4458 Not really. Where do you assume all godless people some how end up in ruin? I highly doubt you've dealt with enough people to really come to that conclusion.
@@Lacey13-i3b I saw what happened today and Ninja has censored me for exactly the same thing - something needs to be said to Ben and Leslie and also to Ninja, who'd be told to "fark off" in no uncertain terms if she wasn't a Mod
Luke 12:53. Larry Siedentrop's book "The invention of the individual" identifies Christianity as the originator of the individual as the fundamental unit of moral action, of society. Siedentrop's thesis being before Christianity there was the family, and each family member was merely a component of the family. Nuclear families were members of a gens, and gens could federate into clans, which could cooperate as tribes, which could identify as nations with kings sworn to defend the family. Nevertheless, before Christianity the individual was worthless and prone to enslavement and commodification without a family and a family patriarch. Christianity introduced the concept that the individual might fight for a universal utopia and that their salvation lay in a kingdom not here on earth.
Christianity maybe focussed on individual , and shared belief or moral should create order, so together they can form succesfull societies? Liberalism is different, because each individual is free to devine it's own morality?
Thanks for the analysis! Could you help me with something unrelated: My OKX wallet holds some USDT, and I have the seed phrase. (air carpet target dish off jeans toilet sweet piano spoil fruit essay). How can I transfer them to Binance?
46:30 try adding those numbers together. ~170 years since the declaration of sentiments. 1848. Feminism got to the point of flappers running wild in the 1920s. The "women question" question contains an assumption that we have to persuade women to 'come along" with some kind of popular movement. You can't solve the problem that way, because that IS the problem. Material circumstances will return women to material dependence on men and they will "come along" without persuasion. After that, men might remember what happened and maintain the natural order going forward
I'm Australian where men and women were more equal. Men and women both got universal suffrage at the same time, and the earliest in history. However, and I know because my mother was a feminist, it was feminism that took away my rights.n
@venga3 somewhatz but we still have a lot of say in how bad it gets, and for how long. Fatalism sort of plays into the effeminacy that got us into this mess
@grannyannie2948 when women have men's "rights" it is never equal. Women have other kinds of social and emotional power that we will never have. They say "it's not fair, I should be able to do everything a man can do. The government should artificially grant me all those powers" but there is nothing like that for men - nor could there or should there be
Benjamin, I appreciate that you continue to have discussions featuring different DR thinkers. Many of them make a lot of sense in some respects; I would hope that you ask each one of them "In your vision of an optimal society, what happens with individual rights, ethnically diverse people who are on your side (many "white" DR are Jewish and/or of multiple ethnic groups, what happens agnostics and atheists?" Only 44 mins in, but Kevin sounds like he doesn't know much about the bond market. I suggest anyone interested in ideas/theories as to what happens with debt, inflation or the US dollar - check out Brent Johnson or Jeff Snider. US debt is 36ish Trillion +/- (haven't checked in a bit) but Global, foreign debt is thought to be about 10x that amount, at least, in what is called the "Eurodollar." Not to be confused with the EU's "Euro," the Eurodollar is basically a digital accounting ledger (e.g. when you get a payment from some party, they don't give you cash, gold, etc. - they credit up your account balance, same thing with the Eurodollar) which is lent into existence by foreign banks and are essentially IOUs in US dollar amounts. Eurodollar was created for money elasticity and other reasons. It's been said by financial analysts that the Eurodollar market doesn't care about US debt (see aforementioned Jeff Snider or George Gammon for many podcasts detailing how this system works, or for a more academic detail, look up Perry Mehrling lectures on YT from Barnard), when liquidity dries up, the global rush is on for the safe collateral of Treasuries. The Fed and other money controllers are far, far more afraid of DEflation rather than inflation.
A DR ideal society should benefit and promote good values, but seldom outright censor leftist opinions and cultural expressions. Degeneracy can still be manifested in secret clubs like it was in pre-war Germany. Anyway, good advice to Ben. It's always good to make these conversation even more sophisticated.
@@gulanhem9495 Thanks, my take is that the largest yet maybe impossible goal is to re-build real life opportunities such that any social appeal of degeneracy is minimized. There were homos and paedos 100 years ago, but no one had drag queen story hours for kids even 30 years ago or less, but hollywood and the creatives in all manner of marketing and keepers of the Overton Window have pushed kinks and degeneracy in an obvious agenda. Perhaps this is why many are going back to the church. I'd agree that individual rights are needed but those should include being able to keep the young from influences they don't need and are not at all age appropriate. Free Speech goes both ways, the freedom to speak, but also the freedom to not listen, see or be assaulted by degeneracy.
@@jesse123185 Exactly. Rufly half of my comments are deleted or hidden even when perfectly innocent. The algo seems tough on all comments when the channel is about politics.
What about counter economics? Same thing that downed the soviet system. Just operate a new system outside the state and let the state become antiquated. Like NASA vs Musk.
Depends, if it's just to the end of fairness to everyone this opens the door to subplant the nation and bring positive vision of a more imposing culture. What we call negative rights were just the cultural imposition of the English merchants over the landed elite of Britain. It was a blind power grab that blatantly banked on the strength of merchants at the expense of the social standing of everyone else in society. The Lockean ideas were penned after this coup took place, and while well constructed, are a contrived post hoc explanation of a right to rule.
Ben, you have a gift for memetic pattern recognition. I think a conversation between you and grim Griz would be synergistic, albeit potentially not suited for the whole of your audience. There’s plenty to talk about. Just think it over.
I always thought Carl Benjamin could wear the badge "Woke right". He is retreating to the corner of "conservatism" assuming there is a functioning societal norm, a conservative homeland to retreat to. To me he is identitarian and somewhat romantic about about a myth that ceased to work in the 1950s. A little Englander. As a graduate of philosophy this is very disappointing. He seems to think we can go living in the past as a solution, another form of utopianism that aims at imminentising some rosey tinted eschaton.
Protestant America is legalism without canon or ecclesiastical law in society. As long as you obey the law, you can do anything. In line with your discussion with John Vervaeke recently.
Oh, Jesus, man... Progressivism is NOT "hyper-liberalism"! It is the OPPOSITE of liberalism, for Pete's sake. This is just a stupid conversation from the start.
"Pass conditions led to current conditions." - Vladimir Lenin Already Sisyphus you can try to roll that Stone back up that hill. But don't complain when it merely crushes you. We cannot go to the Past, the only way out of this is through. To a better and brighter future informed by the past but not the past itself.
@@mregskwach6037 ha fair but I wasn't fed posting. I should have been clear. The conservatives do have the mandate so if you want to change things, get involved in governing, relevant jobs, community/church programs, and school boards. Good people with strong values should be using power now.
Do you guys listen to yourselves afterwards? When you listen, try thinking of saying any of it to a child of any gender or race. Is lack of empathy something you're trying to teach? I'm really rather curious. When I listen, all I understand is that "outsiders" are scary and bad for you/a nation. Do you understand we all live on the same planet? Do you understand things we do in our nation affect "outsiders"? You guys start talking about family and building hierarchy from that, but ... Why should a woman give birth? What if they can't? Is she useless if she's infertile? Is a man useless when he can't produce sperm that can latch? Why is family the be all and end all??? Community use to be family, you didn't have to birth a child, you expect your neighbors and community, teachers and elders, to help guide. I only comment out of curiosity, this is the first time I've seen one of these videos- I'm definitely an anarchist and don't know how this ended up on my feed but. Might as well learn what I can.
This dude seems to be of the opinion that the husband should be the inviolable sovereign over his wife and children, being the sole decider of what their individual rights and interests are.
The road to tyranny is paved with natural rights, those being the natural rights of the individual? I don't even know why he has an American flag hanging up behind him, being that natural law is a foundational principle of American doctrine, a government designed to protect the few from the tyranny of the many, with the individual being considered the greatest minority.
I am not from the US. I live in a country where women always had rights. My mother was a feminist, even as a child I realised that she was stealing my rights by her views and activism. As a woman I would rather submit to a husband than to a feminist. I'm happy to discuss.
In order for civilization to continue most people have to have children. Simple as. You're using edge cases and care/ harm as justification for devaluing behavior that HAS to happen. You are temperamentally a liberal.
The essay Kevin and I discuss: blog.exitgroup.us/p/why-the-westphalian-system-will-collapse
Big Kevin Dolan fan
You cannot have authoritarianism without discrimination. You need cold war authoritarianism to replace hot war dominion.
This dude is right on.
I'm a Kevin Dolan too! I saw this and just started laughing way too hard. And now I need to check out this organization too.
What I got out of studying authoritarian thought reform tactics, the main thing is we're all wired to accept homogeneous moral frameworks.
All 'brainwashing' does is rewire ones moral framework away from that of their traditional culture. Our traditional culture's moral framework looks to be a mix of old school John Locke, basic human rights/property rights, colloquially synonymous with God given rights, with a heaping dose of Christian moral assumptions.
In some specific and substantial ways, our traditional culture is antithetical to the authoritarian thought reform tactics outlined in Robert Lifton's 8. As an example, the 1st amendment to the US constitution includes free speech and freedom of assembly. Compared to #1 of Lifton's 8, 'information milleu', includes censorship and control of association.
Who hasn't said/thought, "how dare the state or anyone violate anothers basic human rights!" To a lot that might sound secular? As one appeals to some nameless, nebulous higher moral authority than the state or anyone, including oneself.
In practice, our culture upheld basic human rights by giving the middle finger to any state authoritarianism deemed over the line of the state.
That's probably the reason Yuri Besmenov said we could avoid 'ideological subversion' by holding to a belief in God.
Imo, Kevin is unaware of our need to accept homogeneous moral frameworks and their power. It's powerful stuff in cults, even more powerful in culture.
It is powerful, if a teacher in the 80s had asked me to read the works of Locke or JS Mill, it would have been a redundant exercise and I'd have reacted when done by saying "tell me some shit I don't already know."
I can't add much to what you've stated here, but after decades of searching for answers, I've arrived at the conclusion that ol' Yuri really was on to something.
It seems inevitable that godless people end up going to bad places. People really do need to revere and worship something higher than ourselves.
@kadams4458 I could add a few things... The anti authoritarian nature of our traditional moral framework, allows the pareto principle in economics to work its magic. We get massively more done through volutary cooperation, resulting in an insane abundance of everything dirt cheap. We get insane scientific, medical and technological advances... vs the Lysenkoism we get currently under authoritarians.
We also have an easy argument for a justification to silence marxists. Free speech being under the umbrella of old school basic human rights/property rights is the reason liable, slander incitement to violence are punishable due to any monetary loss. Aka, a violation of property rights.
Speech promoting marxism is by the very goal of marxism, promoting the loss of property rights.
We just need a spine to enforce it. "Liberalism" and the personal responsibility that comes with Christian moral assumptions has accomplished some fantastic, mind boggling advances. Marxist authoritarians are delusional af for suggesting otherwise and we have the justification to shut them up.
Reminds me of John Lydon's a.k.a Johnny Rotten's recent comment that if you told him the it would be conservatives protecting freedom of expression, And Not the Liberals, he would never have believed you back in the 80-90's.
@@kadams4458 Not really. Where do you assume all godless people some how end up in ruin? I highly doubt you've dealt with enough people to really come to that conclusion.
@@brianshea4177 Conservatives aren't protecting your free speech. TF?
Seems to be an interesting calm on the turbulence of our times. Kitty will be all ears, fuzzy as though they may be 🐱
Your ears are too fuzzy, kitty? (Pulls out electric razor).
@Helena Blavatsky9136 ..... says....."Your ears are too fuzzy, kitty? (Pulls out electric razor).", but was shadowed
WTF? Grow up.
@NinjaKittyBonks
Ninja, do you think that if you weren't a Mod then you'd get involved in half the convo's that you do?
@@Lacey13-i3b
I saw what happened today and Ninja has censored me for exactly the same thing - something needs to be said to Ben and Leslie and also to Ninja, who'd be told to "fark off" in no uncertain terms if she wasn't a Mod
Luke 12:53.
Larry Siedentrop's book "The invention of the individual" identifies Christianity as the originator of the individual as the fundamental unit of moral action, of society.
Siedentrop's thesis being before Christianity there was the family, and each family member was merely a component of the family.
Nuclear families were members of a gens, and gens could federate into clans, which could cooperate as tribes, which could identify as nations with kings sworn to defend the family.
Nevertheless, before Christianity the individual was worthless and prone to enslavement and commodification without a family and a family patriarch.
Christianity introduced the concept that the individual might fight for a universal utopia and that their salvation lay in a kingdom not here on earth.
Christianity maybe focussed on individual , and shared belief or moral should create order, so together they can form succesfull societies?
Liberalism is different, because each individual is free to devine it's own morality?
Thanks for the analysis! Could you help me with something unrelated: My OKX wallet holds some USDT, and I have the seed phrase. (air carpet target dish off jeans toilet sweet piano spoil fruit essay). How can I transfer them to Binance?
46:30 try adding those numbers together. ~170 years since the declaration of sentiments. 1848. Feminism got to the point of flappers running wild in the 1920s.
The "women question" question contains an assumption that we have to persuade women to 'come along" with some kind of popular movement. You can't solve the problem that way, because that IS the problem. Material circumstances will return women to material dependence on men and they will "come along" without persuasion. After that, men might remember what happened and maintain the natural order going forward
I'm Australian where men and women were more equal. Men and women both got universal suffrage at the same time, and the earliest in history. However, and I know because my mother was a feminist, it was feminism that took away my rights.n
For a while. History is cyclical.
@venga3 somewhatz but we still have a lot of say in how bad it gets, and for how long. Fatalism sort of plays into the effeminacy that got us into this mess
@grannyannie2948 when women have men's "rights" it is never equal. Women have other kinds of social and emotional power that we will never have. They say "it's not fair, I should be able to do everything a man can do. The government should artificially grant me all those powers" but there is nothing like that for men - nor could there or should there be
Benjamin, I appreciate that you continue to have discussions featuring different DR thinkers. Many of them make a lot of sense in some respects; I would hope that you ask each one of them "In your vision of an optimal society, what happens with individual rights, ethnically diverse people who are on your side (many "white" DR are Jewish and/or of multiple ethnic groups, what happens agnostics and atheists?"
Only 44 mins in, but Kevin sounds like he doesn't know much about the bond market. I suggest anyone interested in ideas/theories as to what happens with debt, inflation or the US dollar - check out Brent Johnson or Jeff Snider. US debt is 36ish Trillion +/- (haven't checked in a bit) but Global, foreign debt is thought to be about 10x that amount, at least, in what is called the "Eurodollar." Not to be confused with the EU's "Euro," the Eurodollar is basically a digital accounting ledger (e.g. when you get a payment from some party, they don't give you cash, gold, etc. - they credit up your account balance, same thing with the Eurodollar) which is lent into existence by foreign banks and are essentially IOUs in US dollar amounts. Eurodollar was created for money elasticity and other reasons. It's been said by financial analysts that the Eurodollar market doesn't care about US debt (see aforementioned Jeff Snider or George Gammon for many podcasts detailing how this system works, or for a more academic detail, look up Perry Mehrling lectures on YT from Barnard), when liquidity dries up, the global rush is on for the safe collateral of Treasuries. The Fed and other money controllers are far, far more afraid of DEflation rather than inflation.
A DR ideal society should benefit and promote good values, but seldom outright censor leftist opinions and cultural expressions. Degeneracy can still be manifested in secret clubs like it was in pre-war Germany.
Anyway, good advice to Ben. It's always good to make these conversation even more sophisticated.
What’s DR?
@@achipinthesugar
The Dissident right.
@@gulanhem9495 Thanks, my take is that the largest yet maybe impossible goal is to re-build real life opportunities such that any social appeal of degeneracy is minimized. There were homos and paedos 100 years ago, but no one had drag queen story hours for kids even 30 years ago or less, but hollywood and the creatives in all manner of marketing and keepers of the Overton Window have pushed kinks and degeneracy in an obvious agenda. Perhaps this is why many are going back to the church. I'd agree that individual rights are needed but those should include being able to keep the young from influences they don't need and are not at all age appropriate. Free Speech goes both ways, the freedom to speak, but also the freedom to not listen, see or be assaulted by degeneracy.
What are “the DRs” as Ben identifies?
And my comment is gone. I don't even know why I keep trying to comment on YT.
Too many complex sentences and deep thoughts...the YT blog can't handle complexity.
I just don't bother commenting anything more than a sentence or two almost always gets hidden
@@jesse123185
Exactly. Rufly half of my comments are deleted or hidden even when perfectly innocent. The algo seems tough on all comments when the channel is about politics.
Sometimes my own comment gets hidden to me but is kept visible for others. It's crazy.
What about counter economics? Same thing that downed the soviet system. Just operate a new system outside the state and let the state become antiquated. Like NASA vs Musk.
A fraternal order for professional men who are seeking a connection. Hmm
I sure hope this dude has at least three kids
He has 6. But why do u want a Latter Day guy (Christian heretic) to have many kids?
Wat? Negative rights lead to tyranny?
Whilst he stupidly describes a natural duty and plays mystic like he is describing something new.
Depends, if it's just to the end of fairness to everyone this opens the door to subplant the nation and bring positive vision of a more imposing culture. What we call negative rights were just the cultural imposition of the English merchants over the landed elite of Britain. It was a blind power grab that blatantly banked on the strength of merchants at the expense of the social standing of everyone else in society. The Lockean ideas were penned after this coup took place, and while well constructed, are a contrived post hoc explanation of a right to rule.
If ur liberals and still censoring Conservatives then what's that make you, Ben?
Ben, you have a gift for memetic pattern recognition. I think a conversation between you and grim Griz would be synergistic, albeit potentially not suited for the whole of your audience. There’s plenty to talk about. Just think it over.
I always thought Carl Benjamin could wear the badge "Woke right".
He is retreating to the corner of "conservatism" assuming there is a functioning societal norm, a conservative homeland to retreat to.
To me he is identitarian and somewhat romantic about about a myth that ceased to work in the 1950s. A little Englander.
As a graduate of philosophy this is very disappointing.
He seems to think we can go living in the past as a solution, another form of utopianism that aims at imminentising some rosey tinted eschaton.
Not correct on the U.S. Armed Forces, at all.
🧔🧔
We our predators. Our natural rights are not good news ;-(
Protestant America is legalism without canon or ecclesiastical law in society. As long as you obey the law, you can do anything. In line with your discussion with John Vervaeke recently.
So, Catholicism or Orthodoxy?
Oh, Jesus, man... Progressivism is NOT "hyper-liberalism"! It is the OPPOSITE of liberalism, for Pete's sake. This is just a stupid conversation from the start.
"Pass conditions led to current conditions." - Vladimir Lenin
Already Sisyphus you can try to roll that Stone back up that hill. But don't complain when it merely crushes you.
We cannot go to the Past, the only way out of this is through. To a better and brighter future informed by the past but not the past itself.
Honestly, we dont need more people talking about these things. Now is the time for action.
okay, fed.
@@mregskwach6037 ha fair but I wasn't fed posting. I should have been clear. The conservatives do have the mandate so if you want to change things, get involved in governing, relevant jobs, community/church programs, and school boards. Good people with strong values should be using power now.
Do you guys listen to yourselves afterwards? When you listen, try thinking of saying any of it to a child of any gender or race. Is lack of empathy something you're trying to teach? I'm really rather curious.
When I listen, all I understand is that "outsiders" are scary and bad for you/a nation. Do you understand we all live on the same planet? Do you understand things we do in our nation affect "outsiders"?
You guys start talking about family and building hierarchy from that, but ... Why should a woman give birth? What if they can't? Is she useless if she's infertile? Is a man useless when he can't produce sperm that can latch? Why is family the be all and end all??? Community use to be family, you didn't have to birth a child, you expect your neighbors and community, teachers and elders, to help guide.
I only comment out of curiosity, this is the first time I've seen one of these videos- I'm definitely an anarchist and don't know how this ended up on my feed but. Might as well learn what I can.
No kidding!
This dude seems to be of the opinion that the husband should be the inviolable sovereign over his wife and children, being the sole decider of what their individual rights and interests are.
The road to tyranny is paved with natural rights, those being the natural rights of the individual? I don't even know why he has an American flag hanging up behind him, being that natural law is a foundational principle of American doctrine, a government designed to protect the few from the tyranny of the many, with the individual being considered the greatest minority.
I am not from the US. I live in a country where women always had rights. My mother was a feminist, even as a child I realised that she was stealing my rights by her views and activism. As a woman I would rather submit to a husband than to a feminist.
I'm happy to discuss.
In order for civilization to continue most people have to have children. Simple as.
You're using edge cases and care/ harm as justification for devaluing behavior that HAS to happen. You are temperamentally a liberal.