"I DON'T KNOW" Destiny Actually Stumps A Socialist In IRL Debate
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 6 ноя 2023
- DEBATE: Destiny debates Leo on socialism ft. Actual Justice Warrior
SHUT YOUR FACE! Destiny Debates Actual Justice Warrior IRL
► • SHUT YOUR FACE! Destin...
Date: 5 Nov, 2023
ModernDayDebate
► / @moderndaydebate
Leo
► / leophilius
▼Follow Destiny▼
►STREAM - www.destiny.gg/bigscreen
►TWITTER - / theomniliberal
►DISCORD - discordapp.com/invite/destiny
►REDDIT - / destiny
►INSTAGRAM - / destiny
►MERCH - shop.destiny.gg/
Check Out My Amazon: www.amazon.com/shop/destiny
Buy My Merch: shop.destiny.gg/
#destiny
#politics
#debate
SHUT YOUR FACE! Destiny Debates Actual Justice Warrior IRL ►ruclips.net/video/1sYl91dqVLU/видео.html
Destiny And Farha Get Into Actual Argument w/ Erudite And PlayingWithFire ►ruclips.net/video/WjC3jc13N7I/видео.htmlfeature=shared
Steven you need to explain the difference between "free market" capitalism to what we have now which is "crony capitalism". If the western world went back to that we would be much better. ( it will never happen since people and elites wont ever give back the power)
5 seconds in and we're at a trash argument. try looking up what "socialism" means before you just start whining that the soviet union and maoist china ought to count as at least imperfect versions of it. they're the opposite of it (all vanguardist movements inevitably produce the opposite of socialism).
@@anarchodave7997 thank fuck, somebody actually read a book here. Good on ya big cheese.
For the longest time I thought destiny was a socialist and I've been pleasantly surprised how my view of you is more moderate. I think he's slightly left of a moderate democrat, slightly right of a market socialist. I make no bones about my support of capitalism and am not willing to entertain an opinion that can't refute the market efficiency principle.
@@AroundTheBest slightly left of a moderate democrat is still a right wing nutter.. your lack of awareness is profound
HUGE CREDIT for the Socialist guy admitting when he doesn't have an answer to something instead of pretending he does and stunt locking the debate 🎉🎉
Stun*
Or you can use other terms like running out the clock.
Always better off not pretending to know something you don't know. Bro just wants us all to have better lives, what a king.
Destiny never admits he doesn’t know something, that’s how you know he doesn’t engage honestly, it’s impossible for him to always know everything
@@StillElias like when JP says 'well its not entirely obvious to me'
@@NickGhale
pretty sure destiny does
Idealized socialism vs real Capitalism is such a true point.
If you can't admit the glaring oversights in economics (all forms) maybe ethics isn't that important? Or it is and greed is intoxicating? Either way we forgot about that whole concept of sustainability.
Socialism cannot just overtake a capitalist system. It has to happen in a brand new country or it will never work.
@@promethiac2641yup
Yea it’s idealized because market socialism hasn’t been tried yet Lmao only state socialism has been tried. How can we argue for real market socialism when market socialism hasn’t existed
@@pognarchy yeah but nobody knows the history and that fact that thats not even existed in the real world yet.. all they can do to cuck themselves for the sake of the zuck or bezos is cry about how living paycheck to paycheck for 80% of americans in the wealthiest nation in history is low key giga poggers
Holy shit that opening quote goes so fucking hard,
"I have to deal with the realities of real capitalism, while having to argue against Idealize socialism that does not exist anywhere"
So fucking to the point.
Socialists from the Marxist school follow this prediction from over a century ago about how workers will seize the means of production. But the world has changed so much, and they still follow this old model that's never even been proven. It's like a religion. Capitalism slowly raises the standard of living for a many people as possible; Marxism brings the whole society down to the level of the people who have it the worst
One is a tool, the other an ideology. One has a specific systems, the other has only empathy.
@@KneGros-nc1ss Is it even empathy, most socialist I know are leaning towards narcissism.
@@KneGros-nc1ss Both are ideologies. There's no 100% capitalism nor 100% socialism.
@@feizo That's true but capitalism can lead to social programs whereas socialist destroys and hose same social programs with time because it is not sustainable.
This is the best socialist debater I've ever seen. He's not bat crap crazy, and just admits when he doesn't know something. Kudos to him.
Bat crap😂😂😂😂
Bat crap 😅
The best of the worst
What an honor!
He has something likable, but he's verrrry naive in a sense that he claims that all the bad examples are not "true socialism", but then he judges all of capitalism when you could also argue we've never tried true unchecked capitalism. Gov' interference, crony capitalism, and mixed economies w/social programs (aka socialist policies.) is not "true capitalism", but because it is more capitalist than socialist, he considers it straight capitalism. This is where his whole paradigm is both flawed and unfair, but aside from that I agree with you. He also started out very nervous, which is fine, but man, he just emanates that academic, theoretical vibe... he talks about enormous shifts and tasks like they will just simply "happen". Thats kinda easy to say, and how is someone supposed to really respond to that..."no it wont"? lol.
"capitalism has only existed for 200-300 years".
Bruh that's a gross concept error
I love that he says "i don't know" .This guy is searching for truth not looking for a win.We need more like him.
He's not searching for truth. If that was the case, he'd dive deeper into the historical and socieconomical context of socialism and try to seek truth as to why it has always failed to be applied ethically to function properly. He's doing what every socialist is doing which is throw a bunch of ad hocs thinking their criticism of capitalism justifies their own hypothetical application of socialism in the real world which fails to address why it would do better than the current system. He should have provided a better case as to why we should experiment with it without risking other people's livelihood.
They why can't he live in reality?
Yeah, but he's there to argue a position. In a debate setting "I don't know" is about the worst response ever. You have to come up with something to defend the opinion you're representing. I don't think those watching understand the role of a debater. They are an argument, not a person open to being won over (even if they personally are convinced of the other side's correctness.)
@@fewfwefwe4626tru but “idk” is a start and it’s a whole lot more than everyone else who shit out their mouth for 2 hrs clearly not knowing wtf they’re talking about
Yeah but it was a pretty basic question he should have known the answer to. But the reason he didn’t have an answer is because there is no answer.
First good faith socialist debater I’ve seen, kudos to him for his earnest compassion and intellectual honesty
Why argue for either side when you can do both? Socialism is like kickstarter for starving families... We have kickstarters for video games without crying about it. Where is your heart? lol
Socialist guy is dreaming of the day Star Trek becomes reality. But until a replicator that will create anything we want out of thin air becomes a real thing then capitalism is better.
does he know.
This the same guy who says nobody represents the left and the left are the "good guys"
He’s such a lovable nerd
This guy was an amazing opponent. Felt like a great honest discussion rather than trying to score "wins"
He was pretty good. I think he's right in some ways, wrong in others. He's right in that I think it's reasonable to imagine that socialism or something like it will organically evolve out of capitalism, long after we and our great-great-great grand-bibbies are dead. Where he loses me is when he starts talking about non-organic ways of hurrying that along.
i hate how the chat immediately harps on his appearance instead of just hearing him out, he wasnt being bad faith or a bad person at all, no need to be the people we are accused of being
thats gotta kick chat dgg lmaoo
@@garywebb2432 dgg chat always unhinged
It's a Livestream chat for a political streamer. Expecting it to be rational and even handed is peak delusion
The socialist guy is at least intellectually honest as far as 20 mins in to the video. I respect that and wish more of them would follow his lead.
Disagreed. He lied like 30 times in the first 10 mins of his speech.
@@uUuWolf16uUu not knowing, and lying is different. Lying is when you know the truth, and you spread misinformation, spreading misinformation because you don't know shit is ingenuity.
@@renbowo if those were really a lack of knowledge, then he should have never entered this debate.
Dude literally said that co ops perform better than capitalist corporations.
Hint: there is like 1 co op in the top 1% of companies. And that one is not even really a co op.
@@uUuWolf16uUu This entirely depends on how you and he define 'performs better'. If you're defining it as total market value, and he defines it as providing the most benefits to employees while remaining profitable you're using two completely different definitions and each thinking they're correct.
@@uUuWolf16uUu how do you even determine top 1% of companies? some of the largest, most well-known companies generate less profit than a lemonade stand.
I appreciate the socialist's honesty. He does not seem to be suffering from socialism as an identity that must be defended at all costs like most others out there are.
That's exactly my experience with socialists. Both sisters and their circles are all socialist and its kind of their whole lives and all they ever talk about, ever inch of there lives is through a socialist lense.
He does seem like a good dude I hope he makes a full recovery
@@zeno4538 basically it's a cult.
@Tespri yes and they all get together and have meetings every thursday where they literally all reinforce each other's beliefs and basically circle jerk. I've been as a "guest" at a few churches before and the vibe is the same. They also talk about max and lenon as profits. The talk about socialism as the solution to everything and capitolism like a benevolent evil. The route cause to every single issue. I'm not even joking. Socialism gives them a social circle, purpose, community, and something to blame every issue on and fight against. It's for these reasons I've never been able to change their minds even if they don't have a counter argument to my points.
@Tespri part of the reason I'm leaving Sydney is because I'm tired of being surrounded by die hard socialists. It truly is where independent flexible free thought goes to die.
Huge respect to Leo, most intellectually honest and hinged socialist debater I've seen in a LONG time
He didn’t really defend or define anything he just talks in broad terms and says it will happen organically over time and makes a bunch of vague assumptions.
He was cool. Still absolutely wrong. I'll still like him until he tries to take my stuff.
@@coreyleavell6921 That is an insanely reasonable position.
He doesn't even sound socialist :D
@@GBValode so just curious but in a socialist society what happens if all the white people vote to enslave all the black people? You believe in democracy right?
The way this guy described capitalist countries not wanting to trade with a socialist countries is exactly how socialist countries treat capitalist countries lol.
Just from the opening statement, this guy seems like one of the more refreshing and honest proponents of socialism: structured, substantive, and reasonably logical. Of course, I disagree with him, but props to him and I hope he continues his intellectual engagement with debates, politics, government, etc.
This was literally one million times more valuable than the trump biden debate
@@andrewferguson6901wdym we learned a lot from that debate. We learned that Joe is sleepy and Trump is a meanie.
@@tongpoo8985 you only learned that this week?
@@andrewferguson6901 oh I thought you meant the debate between trump and Biden
Coming from a socialist country, I have no respect for people with a missing understanding of the dynamics of groups with power monopoly. It will ALWAYS end in dictatorship. Always! Also, what is the problem of the European concept of social market economy. It is already the answer.
Destiny is so critical of socialism, likely because the proletariat seizing the means of production, across all industries, would reach the natural conclusion that the People would realize; that Destiny is ALL girls names.
Lol
And we can’t have that!
Destiny being a black women, makes sense she has a womens name
Cheesin Heckin Awesome 😂
Props to this dude, his diction drove me up the wall but he's the first person in a WHILE that I've seen that was civil, was open to changing his mind, and was generally good faith across the board. Good on him!
As a blue collar worker (production welder) there's basically nothing I want *less* than _more responsibility_ at my job.
If I can show up and do my work without talking to anybody then it was a perfect day.
How about more money and less hours?
@@sky-magnet not going to happen in blue collar work without resulting in massive inefficiencies that negatively impact society.
@@sky-magnet do you _want_ Snow Crash style hyperinflation? Because that's how you get Snow Crash style hyperinflation.
@@the_inquisitive_inquisitor Under capitalism sure.
@@sky-magnet getting paid more for less work devalues money under any economic system, not just capitalism.
When McDonald's employees make $1M for an 8 hour shift then a Big Mac is going to cost about $100,000
I appreciate this socialist guy. He’s reasonable and good faith. I hope they talk more in the future.
He was completely unreasonable against Chud 😂
I too give him credit for bluntly saying "I don't know" but I honest to God hope Destiny doesn't debate socialists. It's just pointless.
He is a commie. So no.
This felt like a genuine debate.
Easily the most I ever learned from one of these. I feel fortunate to have found this.
Thanks a lot
Extremely impressed with Destiny's charitability and characterisation of the opposing side. Especially near the end in the Q&As when he is steelman-ing and making fairly good points for democratisation of workplaces (or at least combating bad arguments against it). It certainly changed my own perspective on the matter.
The socialist here was also very good-faith, I do feel like he lacked any real-world applications/experience for his ideas which make them difficult to agree with. However, it is clear that this individual genuinely wants to see positive change in the world and is open to alternative ideas and views. I commend him for taking on the debate and hope to see him again one day.
Agreed that it was good to steelman, but to me at least his arguments still fell pretty short for socialism imo
At one of our dinners, Milton recalled traveling to an Asian country in the 1960s and visiting a worksite where a new canal was being built. He was shocked to see that, instead of modern tractors and earth movers, the workers had shovels. He asked why there were so few machines. The government bureaucrat explained: “You don’t understand. This is a jobs program.” To which Milton replied: “Oh, I thought you were trying to build a canal. If it’s jobs you want, then you should give these workers spoons, not shovels.”
I think it was India
That’s a cute story, but with shovels you get jobs and a canal. A spoon gets you jobs but no canal.
@@TonyCox1351 Spoons give you canal too.
@@TonyCox1351 Bro, India really had an employment program where they made people dig up dry wellls for no reason, just for employment.
@TonyCox1351 this may be a little besides the point but, there used to be 100% employment in East Germany. Literally no one was unemployed, even if it was pushing a broom for 8 hours, one day out of every month. Did they achieve a goal of eradicating unemployment? Sure but did they really?
I love how wholesome this comment section is for giving the dude credit for admitting when he doesnt know something
Firmly with Tiny on this one, but huge props to Leo - he’s an impressive advocate and did a great job articulating his points. Really enjoyed watching this.
Super generous of Wendigoon to show up in the front row for support.
😂😂
Research for the debate iceberg
@@juice.giygasan iceberg of debate topics that have come and gone in the online space would actually be based af
This was a far better conversation than generally happen in these debates. Both of them were able to actually hear each other instead of doubling down just to 'win' the debate. Awesome stuff. :)
Which is also surprising as that is usually Destiny's thing: win. Im basing this off of him saying so directly, not to bad mouth him
@@avastone5539 im 90% jekyll
Something I always notice in these more formal debates is destiny's opening statement is always super concise. I think it makes him come across much better.
I tell you what. I may not agree with Leo, but he gets my respect for debating with decorum and didn’t try to sneakily slight and he didn’t use socially charged words. I appreciate that young man. Wish him nothing but the best
The most glaring problem with socialism is it's ability to assume humans will always do the predictable correct thing to ensure it's moral eutopia continues as intended. It doesn't take an intelligent person to understand human behaviors are often not conducive for such a system medium or long term.
You can say the same or similar about capitalism too. You always assume that capitalism leads to innovation, it leads to meritocracy blah blah but in reality it either doesn’t or leads to bad outcomes
Socialism isn’t perfect, anyone who’s good faith will concede that, but it’s better than capitalism. The question comes down to which system is more likely to generate better outcomes overall and capitalism is definitely the worse of the two
@@pognarchy"It either doesn't or leads to bad outcomes" is just ahistorical lol
Just need to look at the tremendous growth of the past 300 years and universal improvement of QoL. Capitalism with its flaws has this wealth of evidence, socialism doesn't, the "reality" of it doesn't exist.
@@pognarchyI feel like I'm cheating because the video we're watching is proof enough. But you're just wrong. Late stage capitalism has been led by bad policy and people with power not working with the rules; IE monopolies. This can be fixed with a reset and good policy that's better enforced.
Since we have a great idea of what late stage capitalism looks like, tell me in good faith what late stage socialism looks like? If not evolved into communism or worse.
@@pognarchyCapitalism works with selfish and selfless individuals. Socialism can only work if there are selfless individuals. That's why the implementation of socialism so far in history often becomes tyrannical right away. Always requires authoritarianism to barely function by forcing people to be a certain way when they won't all the time.
The problem with capitalism is the abyss. It rewards the worst behaviors and locks us in to servitude unless you sell out and become a shark. No you don't need planned obsolescence and oligopolies to run a country.
Props to the socialist guy for showing up. Many people on that side of the argument don't believe in debate. Held his own respectfully.
This is a really interesting evolution of "that wasnt real socialism". We've made it all the way to "socialism has never existed, and also nobody knows wtf it is or how it would work, it's impossible to guess what it would look like, but whatever it is it's absolutely way better than capitalism."
This is by far my favorite comment and I felt the same way through the entire video it’s like OK so this guy has absolutely no idea how any of the mechanisms or modes of motivation are that would ever solve any of the problems that Socialism says that it might solve in a capitalist society. He has absolutely no clue what it would look like or how it would work or how these types of motivations word manifest themselves. He has absolutely no idea what any of it would look like in any facet of any sort of economy ever and has no idea how to get any of them actually going in the direction that he wants to, but Socialism is totally better because
He also says it would be good to "force" socialism, a system that he claims will organically evolve it if the current system. I can't give credit to anyone actually debating something they know nothing about and can't explain without contradicting themselves. Debates are for ideas that can be articulated, I wouldn't have a problem with this guy expressing his hopes and dreams for humanity, but he's arguing that he and other ideologues would be morally right to use "force" on their neighbors in order to change the way things work.
I actually loved listening to the other guy. He laid out his ideas in a very clear and concise way and was honest and self reflecting throughout the whole debate. What is his name? I'd love to hear more of him.
Waiting for someone to write his name. Leo...?
Big ups for conceding and admitting when you don’t know something. I wish more people had their ego in check enough to manage this. If results in a conversation actually being fruitful and not just word games to see who can confuse their opponent
@@WhatsTheTakeaway also opens the door to a new position
@@WhatsTheTakeaway it’s also the pathway to an informed opinion. You have to admit you’re wrong in order to learn what’s right
@@WhatsTheTakeaway You don't need to know every single possible rhetorical position of whatever group you are a part of. That is absurd, especially when someone produces a novel idea to counter it where then you haven't taken to the time to think it through properly. YOU do not know everything in all of your views either. Its much better for him to be honest and say he hasn't thought about it, than to lie, obsfuscate, ignore, goalpost shift, etc.
And not thinking through every single detail of your belief does not indicate their belief is wrong or "failed". Someone can believe in heliocentric round earth, then when a person produces some random thing like olber's paradox, which you may not have researched before hand, that is then twisted into flat earth geocentric evidence, you are caught off guard. But, because you didn't HAPPEN to think about olber's paradox as a counter, then you have no counter for it. But it doesn't mean the earth is now flat and the position is automatically failed. That's an incredibly simplistic way to view debates and discussions, and is responsible for a lot of what is wrong in america with the us vs them mentality.
@@WhatsTheTakeaway Thats just called not having a point. Not knowing an aspect or counterargument to a hypothetical/counter is not the same as having no argument to begin with. Don't be silly
Remember guys, Leo may seem reasonable as far as socialists go, but MLs like Second Thought and Eddie Liger would not claim him.
nobody cares
@@coreyander286Leo doesn't claim Vaush as a thought leader or a representative of the left.
@@coreyander286I think it's an even split. But I can see more people getting radicalized into tankies
Nor would they allow him to be alive because he is a counter revolutionary.
What is ml? Militant leftist?
I’ve watched about an hour and ten minutes into this and I’m left slightly dissatisfied. For those who believe and know capitalism to be the best economic system to date, here is how you argue it.
Under socialism, money either loses some or all of its value. This has immense consequences and completely alters or eliminates incentive structures required in order to keep our society functional.
The truth is, many jobs are neither fun nor fulfilling, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t necessary. Under a socialist system where the incentive of earning a higher wage is lost, certain essential jobs will never be filled.
Who will work on an Oil Rig or in Coal Mines etc? These are jobs that nobody wants to do but are entirely necessary in order for our modern societies to maintain a high quality of life. The monetary incentive is what drives an influx of workers into these professions. When you disrupt that incentive, the workforce diminishes.
This is one of the many reasons why “socialist” states devolve into authoritarianism. Essential jobs do not get done, the government recognizes this and forces people to do them. Not to mention that some people are better suited for certain jobs than others. Is it efficient for the government to assign work to an unqualified worker? The more you try to understand the ramifications of such a system, the more market inefficiencies begin to reveal themselves.
I will confess that the potential for an artificial workforce makes things more complicated and a universal basic income could potentially be necessary. That said, I believe the ultimate goal of capitalism is to provide incentives in order to continue to raise our collective quality of life. AI, along with countless other technologies invented under capitalistic systems, have undoubtedly done exactly that.
Why does money lose its value under socialism? You seem to be describing a system with no inequality of income, but the labor theory of value doesn't remove that inequality, it changes how those incentives are determined and how resources are distributed.
@@humanmerelybeing1966if the 10’s of thousands of people working in the energy sector are engaging in profit sharing then there will be a vast amount of people with LOTS of money and if that is seen in other industries then the value of money will decrease and there would be high levels of inflation. That would need to be supplemented by heavy government regulation and well done you just made the precursor to every other socialist authoritarian government. If the energy sector has profit sharing why tf would you work for a small business, etc. it won’t work that way
@@user-bg6qr9mh3i Socialism and profit sharing aren't the same thing.
Great panels! Love this, keep it up Destiny!
If he thinks that worker co-ops are more efficient than more traditional businesses, I don't understand what his reasoning is for them not having taken off? Why hasn't some savvy businessman founded a big co-op & crushed his competition?
Cause the evil capitalists sabotage it to maintain their evil system..
At least, thats the answer I imagine hasan would give..
because co-ops are effective but the market volatility dissappears when the customers have one choice. its a monopoly and an unchanging revenue technically.
My guess is big corporations, through loopholes in our system, effectively being able to change legislation in their favor. Which makes it hard for different types of business to compete. I would need to find actual examples of this, but if true seems like a big flaw of capitalism that we should fix.
@@ZEIT9393You could argue it exposes a flaw of co-ops and market socialism: It just cannot compete without a societywide shift away from existing systems (which is not something market socialists believe is necessary).
There are principles that can be used and are compelling enough to have real world applications. Employees having a stake in the profits of the company will motivate them, just look at commission based jobs or at August's work ethic. But can such systems work at scale?
@@ZEIT9393Even if I accept that Captialism stifles Socialist competition through pressure on representatives to pass legislative hurdles for running co-ops. It is still better than Socialists eliminating Capitalist competition through making Captialism illegal and punishable by re-education or death.
Smart young bloke and hopefully he keeps that idealism as the world will inevitably try and crush it.
The world tends to crush silly ideas, which poindexter is full of.
@shoobidyboop8634 Most kids are. That's the time of their life they should be experimenting, rather than being afraid of being wrong.
@@evelynashe8701 Which is why they're not entrusted with any responsibility at that age. They haven't lived enough even to realize socialism is a crock.
The thing about getting older, is you tend to stop viewing the world the way you want it to be, and start viewing it as it actually is. That's why people tend to get more conservative as they get older.
@@markzuckergecko621 People get more conservative with age, but people also get more wealthy with age on average, something that much more directly correlates with conservative party alignment. You're more likely to vote for lower taxes and benefits if the costs are coming out of your income rather than someone else's.
This was a great debate. Great listen while i get some work done
First real debate I have heard in a long time! Great Listen
My dad worked at one of the largest co-ops in America when I was growing up, and the truth of the matter is that worker co-ops are not that different than corporations in practice. They still have their corporate executive boards. Those people make all of the rules. They still make millions while the employees just 1 rank below them are only making hundreds of thousands. One of the biggest memes that leftists have is that worker co-ops will somehow bring us closer to socialism, when really all that it does is codify capitalism.
They always point to Mondragon, but it still has an overarching corporate structure. And one of the primary reasons that Norway's Statoil was successful during the economic/oil downturn in 07/08, unlike Venezuela, is that they have a corporate structure and diversified holdings.
He probably worked at an ESOP or something similar. Not all "coops" are created equal.
@@aimless_aimer7936sounds like an excuse. We have to take reality as evidence in the debate. If worker coops can still be shit, then we can’t hold them up as a good standard when the corporation is so flexible and adept at getting results.
@@aimless_aimer7936 Successful co-ops are those that operate under a capitalist framework.
@@Xplora213most start ups fail therefore if capitalist companies can still be sh*t we can't hold them up as a good standard
"Socialism needs to arise organically, therefore let's implement policies to artificially encourage its adoption" LMAO
I think he means that if you put out things like universal healthcare and other socialist solutions - given democratic support - then the public will be less dogmatized against it and be open to more. That’s an organic rise.
There are alot of Americans who are open to a Medicare for all for example, especially when it is broken down to them. Just like how the NHS cannot be removed, only improved bc the UK public wants it despite being staunchly anti socialist for decades.
@@TriggeringOpinionsandFacts I see no reason why universal healthcare would be considered socialism at all. In a capitalist society having clear and established rules that make markets predictable and making working in a capitalist society worthwhile is a very capitalist thing to do.
@@CrestOfArtoriaswell it isnt but any actual socialist system would have nationalized healthcare.
It's like saying that lettuce is not a burger but it's still a necessary part of building a burger if that makes sense
Socialism won't happen "organically", just like how democracy has never happened "organically"....it will require some sort of upheaval to overthrow the status quo.
I dont think you understand how human are dumb. You could see the gov as a organic system. More than the stupidity of masses.
One of the best discussions I’ve seen in a long time. Very little or no ego and just honest attempts to solve the problem.
I was worried the comments on him were all gonna be shitting on him for getting 'stumped' like the chat was during the stream. It's nice to see people are supporting him for saying 'I don't know'. I think political conversations would be a lot easier if more people were comfortable saying those three words
I'm suspicious that the real reason is just because they privately back socialism.
Stream chats are really the peak of reactionary ignorance, even for people like Destiny. Sad to see.
“You can’t have socialism in a broadly capitalist world.” That’s actually the only way you can have socialism.
Yup. You can always opt in to socialism in a capitalist society but can never opt in to capitalism in a socialist society.
@@Dementia.Pugilistica This type of mirrored thinking is wrong. Capitalism has long benefited from socialist countries, and so have socialist countries with capitalist countries. There is not one can opt-in, and other doesn’t opt-in. Profit-incentive options have remained in-part with socialist countries, and you also have capitalists in socialist countries like China.
@mesh01550 of course you can opt in but not opt out of socialism. Socialism is controlled by the largest or most overarching jurisdiction that entities are required to follow. Socialist societies require the rules of socialism to be observed in all familial, commercial and communal structures, but under capitalism not all family, business and communal structures are required to be capitalistic.
There is nothing preventing people in capitalist societies from pooling resources and running a community that has socialized prescriptions or internal rules, or a privatized company structure that runs like a defacto government within the constrains of the prevailing federal and lesser jurisdictional laws, or a family structure with social requirements to be part of the household.
There are communes that do this all over the USA and Canada. There are CO-OPs. There are family structures that may follow a socialized form of internal government whereby parents decide to partition resources equivalently, decide tasks of the children according to top down decision-making, fund them the same, dissalow them from owning property, etc etc. The opposite is not be true because any of these smaller entities would be required under socialist guidelines to construct themselves under guidelines that are not encompassing of capitalist guidelines.
I didn't make an argument that capitalist countries and socialist countries haven't benefited from or harmed each other and don't see how that's relevant to what I said. Profit-focused models of socialist countries may exist, but they exist to make profit for the state not the private individual or as pooled resources at best which has all the same issues pointed at capitalist greed perhaps more so because we are dealing with a collective greed, which are crucial non-equivalencies. China is a mixed economy and is not a good example of a socialist country as socialists argue for (idealized socialism). It is also markedly more corrupt than any western country...
@@Dementia.Pugilisticain theory, yes you could opt out of socialism. In a socialist country you could theoretically have a commune that doesn’t pay into the system and doesn’t get paid out of it. Not saying it’s realistic, but none of socialism is realistic.
@@Dementia.Pugilistica Bravo!
That intro just clicked for me, because it summarizes EXACTLY the issues I have when debating against many socialists and communists online (I also debate other groups fyi). It's always the current existing and flawed capitalist nations and systems I need to defend or justify against theoretical and nonexistent communist utopias. They literally use the classic lines of "TRUE communism does so-and-so", while responding to me saying "But this capitalist system in America does so-and-so".
This really opened my eyes. I'm gonna need to keep this in mind next time someone brings it up
As a socialists I see the opposite. Trying to conceive a system that will perfectly solve all the issues and will have to be as complex as reality. Its also called utopistic a lot because trying to do so pushes people to arguing for perfect system. While the capitalist can just point at the system and say "it works" we cannot as there was never a global socialist economy. What kinds of effect it might have is literary impossible to conceive, but somehow that is what people ask of us. Show us your world before we can make it.
This also often happens in broad general discussions and not in actual conversations as you can simple ask what people accept. Is the capitalist arguing for the exact copy of the system in the USA? is the Socialist arguing for the copy of USSR? Most often they do not, making them both less dependent on the realities and more on theoretical explanations.
@@lexter8379 I think you just kinda proved his point, "there was never a global socialist economy" = that wasn't true socialism. The fact of the matter is we have seen the attempt to implement socialism and each time it has ended up in disaster.
@@Banisowicz What? That is a fact. Even if you say that everything ever called socialism was socialism, it was never global as is capitalism now. Also, my point was about how I feel from the opposite side and not much else.
Also "trying to implement socialism" is pretty vague. To be more precise it would be something like this. "One of the socialistic ideologies that tried to implement socialism was Marxist-Leninism and failed to do so and instead created a none socialistic different system that a lot of other state replicated,"
There is a common misconception that all the ML states wanted socialism, no they wanted ML system (which was not socialism by definition). They didn't care about some ideals or "we will make it work" they simply wanted a system that rapidly industrialize and defends them from capitalist exploitation.
You can use this argument against people who want ML type system. But its not an argument against worker control.
dear reader please don't get tempted to answer this dude's drivel
@@lexter8379Not real socialism. Yall just keep looping. Quick question chief, you're allowed to be in a worker owned co-op under capitalism. Are you in one?
One of the best debates Destiny has done and also one of the most respectful. Especially coming to this from the Actual Justice Warrior debate 😂 that was a joke.
I like how whenever Destiny brings up the fact that under socialism workers could vote in favor of things that would earn them more money, even if it were to hurt the environment or just over produce goods, his response is that he doesn't think they will. As if all greed will just disappear under socialism, like its not a feature of human nature.
Right, because the underlying belief of socialists is that the only reason why people like money is because capitalism forces them to. When in reality, as the gentlemen from the audience asked around 1:18:00 or so, the desire for resources, even in abundance, is human nature.
A socialistic system won’t magically make people only want what they need as opposed to taking anything they can get their grubby little hands on. Capitalism naturally evolved because it’s best suited to match the pursuit of resources. If socialism were to take hold, the pursuit of resources would remain the exact same, but the ability to do so would be hindered.
Appealing to human nature isn’t super effective imo but humans also have altruistic tendencies it’s not exclusively greed. It’s not an unreasonable opinion to hold to think that workers would vote for things that benefit society long term, especially in a more cooperative society by and large.
@@samuelbailey2000i mean, we could just look at the places that have moved in a more socialist direction and see what the outcomes were, and inevitably (see: every single time), greed and corruption actually seemed to exacerbate, not disappear. I know the western socialists response is typically to think "BUT IF I was the one leading the socialist revolution, we'd do it properly!!" but that's pretty short sighted. Especially since most western socialists emotional dislike for capitalism springs from a hate and jealousy of the rich, not a love for the poor. (Not saying youre like this, but many definitely are). The experiment has been run, unfortunately
@@martymcfly88mph35 Right, but the system he was advocating for didn’t include a revolution or a vanguard. I don’t think the argument holds up when the people we’re talking about aren’t holding more power than the people next to them. I do think that greed is more inevitable when small groups of people take control of the government for some sort of greater good. But that is not the argument. The point is that assuming workers would be willing to vote for things for the betterment of society on average. Which could be wrong, but I don’t think is an unreasonable or damaging assumption to make.
@@samuelbailey2000 You still see greed happen when ballot measures are put out and people vote to expand spending even when the state or city does not have the funds for it. The size of the group does not change the jealousy or greed. If all the coops were paid the same, why would one coop not vote to work less hours? If the coops are not paid the same, then why would the people that wanted more try to go to a different coop or start a different one?
I would argue history showcases humans tend to be greedy and jealous, and I think the reason why capitalism works as a system of economic organization is because it harnesses those aspects of human nature to further efficient production. If humans were not greedy or jealous, then capitalism would not be as effective at running markets as other systems of economic organization.
If human nature was as this large assumption stated, I think capitalism would not exist and I would use the success of capitalism to reject that assumption.
Remember when the tides shift back to liberal democracy, we were the ones defending it
Copium
Liberalism?
Dude, the way left is going the next pendulum swing of the political compass will NOT stop at liberalism.
Actually liberalism is not bad .Left wing liberalism sucks.But your classical liberal of free speech and freedoms that make America great are not bad Dave Rubin is one such individuals.
@@63Limarnah, some form of liberalism is probably king.
Its a reasonable, pragmatic system that actually works.
Inshallah brother.
1:21:06 So if capitalism creates the wealth in the first place why would you want to destroy it in favor of a socialist system? Why not have a regulated capitalist system that ensures that the poor do receive some of the resources generated? Why would you destroy the engine of production that is capitalism? If poor people are starving why not just allocate resources towards feeding them? You know like we have with food stamps and welfare?
@Destiny 1 complaint. The mics of debators were well caliberated. But the mic used by the anouncer/live-audience wasn't, kinda the same problem you pointed out with L-Asan's mic, where it cuts off in the middle of speaking, I don't remember the technical term, but the mic is less sensitive or something like that. You guys prolly didn't have problems listening, cause you guys were in the same room, but very bad experience for the internet viewers.
My favorite critique of socialism is Thaddeus Russell's. The main problem of socialism is that no one would want to show up to the meetings. There are always going to be try hards but as someone who is in a union, most people don't care, just want to do their job and go home and not vote on company policy.
Exactly and then eventually it would end up like an HOA, where there is a couple of hard-core prominent and influential people, dictating the rules and regulations over the entire system over all of the employees who supposedly have an equal and fair say, but like you said in a union a lot of people don’t care and don’t show up to the meetings so the people that do it will dictate policy just like in a capitalist system a CEO, CFO, and other executive titles would do. They would be a select few people at the top making decisions for everyone else and I feel like 50 or 100 years down the socialist economic ladder. You would see the exact same problems that capitalism has because humans inevitably will make decisions that are better for them and worse for others.
im german and extremely glad that im old enough to have experienced one of the "best" planned socialist economy that ever existed: east Germany.
not only did i whitnessed people being forced to work for NOTHING in return. not voluntarily: FORCED TO WORK FOR NOTHING IN RETURN. i have seen people saving up money for a decade to buy something that takes 16years to deliver (Trabbi, Wartburg).
in one of the most prosperous socialist systems that ever existed.
have you ever stood in line for 2 hours to look at an empty shelf?
and on your way back you see the "Kaufhaus des Westens" that has full shelfs of stuff you never heard of and that you can't even afford becuase they only take westmark and no bank in your sh*thole of a country will exchange your worthless money for it because it gets more worthless every single minute?
and you see the champagne socialists in the shop buying western toys for their children, the same ones that tell you to not trust capitalists pigs and hold you inside an open air prison where they can torture you in a blacksite when you express reality?
well, i have. and i don't miss it one bit.
Son of Tito-land here👋🏻,i tell these kids-“its like Black & White TV replaced everything”,or its like now,but more corrupt & unfair,its really easy,never knowing how much bread & milk will cost,cuz hyperinflation,these kids would Just drop..😂
another funny anecdote: when you wonder why everybody was standing in line to see an empty shelf but nobody said anything, everybody knew that half of the people present were informants for the government. the moment you complain you land on a list. it doesn't matter if the complain was valid. if you were on this list your whole family couldn't travel, you could not exchange money and you were 1 complaint away from being tortured. nobody told you but you knew.
@@SabracadabrO yeah, its like: you don't even know where to start to explain really how sh*tty it was to live under socialism.
instead of black and white TV i would say it was like living in darkness with no ray of light. its unimaginable for me now, how do you explain that to milennials that think free speech is fascism?
you need so much context to really explain how bleak it was.
@@oddctioum That was universal to all”socialist try-outs”(cccpr-lite)entities(dictatorships)& languages,along with Black market Levis then Hugo Boss knock-offs later,these kids thinking lgbtq rights & human rights in general are gonna improve,are in for a shock..,comrad..🤘🏻🤣
@@oddctioum look,the FOOTAGE is there,these people are Just passed around the various indoctrinations after religion,that motivated reasoning evolves into wishful thinking,i used the B&w tv analogy cuz you KNOW,but i usually say”just wipe everything with a heavy,Musty curtain of beige & grey,any happiness was DESPITE the system,that simple,survive till the next day,barely..
Shout out to the moderator's sick nasty farts in the middle of the debate. He was so real for that.
👃👃👃👃👃
bruh we need timestamps; i need to know if these farts were capitalist fake news or socialist propaganda.
I love how cordial this conversation was. Please invite him to the stream ❤
great stuff!
Respectful debate and I’m here for it.
I really enjoyed this debate, this guy was trying to be super realistic and I really enjoyed that.
As a "tech worker", who makes a healthy six figure salary, I can say I do think about these things, and I'm 100% happy with our capitalist mode of operation.
This was great pog
I learned some things during this debate..it’s nice to see to reasonable guys defend and concede there positions…vs a Hasan Piker and Matt Walsh spewing generalizations,hyperbole and insults at each other
I don’t think socialists realize how much of an insult it is to say working class people don’t have time to think about what’s best for them so I’ll do it
Literally every ideology is guilty of this.
As if we dont think during work either. Like the 98% of working class people from doctors to warehouse workers wakeup, turn on work consciousness, and then black out for 9-10 hours. Then when we get home, we switch on our other consciousness, get overwhelmed with life, and me no think no more, me go to sleep, and maybe me think on weekend. LOL
He just cant assume people just reject your system, and are in no way shape or form interested in your pipe dream. Hasan and Vaush have both made similar statements of you just dont know any better, sometimes hoisted with the language of also just theyre too busy to think. Its condescending and idiotic. I dont work in a coal mine. Im listening to audible and podcast for 8 - 10 hours a day at work. Im fortunate, but its not some super upper working class job I have (Doctors for instance have for less time to just enjoy listening to frank sinatra at work than I do. lol).
All I do is think think think think think. It drives me nuts. I wish i could activate a consciousness that just goes on autopilot, does everything right in life, and every 4 months i can pop back in and fuck around. LMAO
I mean there is truth to it. its not only the working class.
Honestly many of them don't,seems like you aren't working class.
@@jayargee492 anarchism and libertarianism are the exact opposite of this.
Im new to destiny this is the first debate I have seen that the opposite debater has actually been able to properly debate and it is so enjoyable.
We are not seeing capitalism cracking, we are seeing statism cracking.
If capitalists are not overproducing food, then when disasters happen that cause shortages, people starve. A lot of people starve around the world because of dictators in their country.
Environmentalism is also not a market failure, in fact it's quite profitable to preserve resources.
Right in my feeeeeeed.
I disagree with both of you on the idea that people should be forced to provide for others that are either unwilling or unable to provide for themselves.
Biggest crossroad in the socialism vs capitalism debate. Socialists think they are entitled to survival, even if that means someone else has to fund it. Complete insanity that so many people think that way.
This is literally the best socialist i've seen debating, super honest and doesn't base everything on super risky perfect ideologies. I am and have been a socialist and almost everything he said was exactly what I've been thinking when watching socialists say that capitalism is evil and stuff like that.
One can believe capitalism is evil (I do), however you can acknowledge the scant good it has done while being horrible overall.
@surojexa7683
Despite capitalism many flaws, it is still a far superior system than socialism, communism, or fascism by a wide margin.
@@redluck3048 they all turn into the same thing.
How is me trading you 3 bananas for your 5 dollars "evil"? How is me paying you 150 dollars; a price we agreed upon with no outside coercion, to detail my car evil? Capitalism is neutral. Socialism is where the government starts coercing people.
So a delusional person right
What a chill debate opponent huge respect
"I have too much money", said by no one ever...
It's insane to me how significant the gap in sanity between even market socialists and marxian socialists/communists is.
Opening statement:
"Owning private property is only a 300 year old idea"
"Labor theory of value"
"Nationalize everything"
"Capitalism isnt evil"
"Capitalism guarentees the starvation of 7 million people annually"
Well congrats Destiny on winning the debate before it starts
I love the way all nuance evaporates in these discussions. No society is solely capital or solely socialistic. There’s a blend and the blend lines are where we should debate. A better investment from and in workers is definitely required to make working conditions better. The best jobs tend to have unions. Unions tend to be socialist.
Unions are only possible in a capitalist society
During the debate I asked a question (57:35): "Question for Destiny: why do you support unions if they are inherently anti-capitalist?"
Destiny's answer was not clear from my perspective
@@alelzarterl212 yeah it’s interesting. If I was gonna steelman him I’d say that he sees the unions as not anti capitalism but as push back within the capitalist system. That might be unions but it also might be individual wage demands or entrepreneurs or collective bargaining via boardroom takeover etc etc.
the trouble is the capitalism n it’s purest form doesn’t figure any push back. The push back comes from opposing ideologies so that I think you’re correct in questioning destiny’s seeming and uncharacteristic lack of nuance here. He seems to dismiss the socialist movements influence on unions and the fact, imho, that without socialism injected into the free market model you don’t get fair workers rights. The best example in history I can give is the British workers arc from
1860 to 1960. 1860 workers were seen as expendable and if they lost their lives they were relaxed by another desperate human being. Kids were used for jobs so dangerous that the result of an accident was being mashed and diced inside of a mechanical loom. By 1960 the input of socialism had almost reached a point where, men at least, had a healthy wage and their lives were generally held in a higher regard. This wasn’t solely socialist in its evolution but it was the biggest proportion of influence.
Manchester (U.K.) science ad industry museum is such a great source of history for this. Combined with the slavery aspect you ca fail to come away realising that in human beings are left without regulation then they do the most heinous acts and that religion and capitalism can be the justification catalyst and the fuel to commit them.
@@schenksteven1that’s not true. Planned economies and communist economies can have unions. These types of economies have the same possibility of abusing workers rights. You can’t really have unions in a dictatorship if the dictator is a tyrant.
“The All-China Federation of Trade Unions (ACFTU) is the national trade union center of the People's Republic of China. It is the largest trade union in the world with 302 million members in 1,713,000 primary trade union organizations. The ACFTU is divided into 31 regional federations and 10 national industrial unions.”
@@Theactivepsychos Sorry, I should have been more precise... you are technically correct. What I should have said is that "unions that have any functional power are not possible in a marxist society." Obviously you can have groups called unions in a command economy, they just can't have any actual negotiating power, otherwise it's not a command economy, de facto.
Most respectable and likeable socialist I've seen by far
How do you stump a socialist in a debate?
You ask them a question.
This is so true happens so much when I ask them just tell me how
😂😂😂😂
*tips fedora*
@@seanhannitysninthDUIhell yea brother
Was that a fart?? 57:48
Edit: nope. Just AJW clearing his throat lol
The reason i'm not a socialist is because we don't need to make capitalism illegal for socialism to exist. Nothing is stopping socialists from getting together and forming coops, there's nothing stopping socialists from existing in the current system. But more often then not they choose not to, and in many cases popular advocates of socialism are some of the most ruthless capitalists.
I wish more socialist and communist would give their ideas for certain topics and discussions. Instead of them reffering to pre made definitons like marxist ideas. Saying you don't know is a better option then saying something stupid, but the best option would be to have atleast some general idea of how you think things should work.
Exactly. He’s been getting a lot of praise for saying I don’t know (rightfully so), but it’s quite a problem if the advocates for socialism are unable to answer CORE economic questions such as “how would janitor unions advocate for themselves against the interest of other unions” to paraphrase.
I’m glad he was honest, but to not have a solid answer to that question is quite worrying.
Under capitalism it’s as simple as “pay what you’re willing to, and if both parties agree that’s that.” Socialism seems to want to add a layer of ‘fairness’ to this, but it’s utterly ineffective to attach an economic system to something so subjective.
1:15:10
Destiny: if the coop would make more money to overproduce food, why wouldn't they?
Leo: I don't think they would.
damn Leo da be deep! xD
Right, socialists argue that the only reason why people desire profit is because capitalism forces them to. But people have ALWAYS (and likely will always) wanted as many resources as possible. Socialism isn’t going to magically make everyone think “oh I’ll just take what I need, and more more thanks”.
AYO 😂 IS NO ONE GONNA POINT OUT THE FUCKING FART AT 57 minutes or so lmaooooooo
There's a co-op near where I live. They sell a number of organic naturally sourced foods and are very conscientious of their impact on the environment. I thought they were a fantastic store. A little while ago however it came out that one of the multiple owners had SA'd a female employee of theirs, and because he had an equal stake in the company as everyone else, they decided to cover it up instead of addressing it and firing him (like what would have happened if it were a capitalist company.)
See, and that is another problem with Socio markets, and that is FA majority of that cooperative market are doing some thing that is detrimental to not only the market in existence, but the society as well absolutely nothing will change because majority rules, and if the majority are looking out for their own best interest which all of human history says that humans do then nothing will change, but in a capitalist top down authoritative company that society can choose to basically forced against the majority change
59:00 he got caught, covered the fart with coughing 😂
My guys, you gotta start by defining capitalism and socialism. Especially in the case of the latter, as socialism-apologists always rely on definition-creep, and usually get away with it.
"rather than fix the fixables of capitalism I propose we try something that is shown to be rotten from the outset and devolves very quickly into something that has people running back to capitalism!"
Damn, i see so much of myself in this guy. It feels like I'm watching myself 2 years ago trying to debate market socialism before finally swallowing the liberal pill on things.
I think if he keeps on track to pursuing intellectual honesty over idealism he'll come around to seeing just how much better liberal economics is over any of the 31 different flavors of socialism or whatever that exist.
Curious, what pushed you to that realization? Was this a single moment or a gradual process? Particular thinkers or particular issues? Fascinated how that process works if you would indulge me.
I haven't identified with socialism in a few years now but I feel like so many of these young socialist 'debaters' only read political science from the 1800's and early 1900's and think they can paste these theories into the modern world 1:1. Modern socialists need to embrace economics in a big way rather than dismiss it outright as an unimportant scam (thoughtslime), and accept that inequalities will not only still exist under socialism, but are probably a desirable thing to have in any economic system.
This is pretty spot on, I’d add that adopting modern capital economic and finance methods of accounting doesn’t conflate to adopting capitalist methods of economic and financial accounting. It’s the conflation between the methods in which capital as a tool is utilized to procure more capital goods, expansion of capital and capital as a historical role in developing the economies of the world (generation of capital), and the established capitalist social-relation in proliferating value by various means of capital accumulation, and generalizing all capital outputs (i.e commodities, oil, gas, fuel, electric, energy etc) on the basis of the profit-incentive as the dominant social relationship that shifts the generation of capital, and the implication, being the generalization of the capitalist mode of production and all of capitalism’s proponents. The historical role of capital, in both China and Vietnam for e.g when their main objective in emancipating and liberating the social productive forces of the country, all contents and proponents are related to the scope of opening-up to all capital investments, independent enterprises that covers their profits and losses, and regulating the core rules of the market system by creating a vibrant-competitive playing field between multiple economic agents (state, cooperative, collective and private, foreign capital etc). All of their economic literature and contents are centred mainly on the positive utilization of capital (not utilizing capitalism, eventually bypassing capitalism), the existence and the acceptance in the historical stage of capital, created new creative ways of developing socialist society, without eliminating or limiting ways we can organize all capital by attempting to prematurely implement a ‘post-capital’ communist society in the lower and higher stages. Since a lot of socialist countries existed near the more peripheral regions by core capitalist countries of the world where uneven development contributed to the limitation of developing the capitalist mode of production and the continual peripheralization of semi-feudal regions of the world (colonized). Since, a lot of socialist countries that began the transition from semi-feudal society into socialist society like China, Vietnam, USSR, Laos etc, the issue relating to bypassing capitalism has remained a central feature of their economics. As capitalism has existed many more hundreds of year than socialism has, the existence of socialism being only over a hundred years it still has many more years in eventually surpassing the capitalist mode of production as a means in surpassing all capitalist metrics (in terms of productive forces, national stock and incomes, revenues etc), and human social development metrics (by creating more socially equitable and equal distributions of wealth and outcomes for everybody regarding healthcare, literacy, education, talents and opportunities etc). If the socialist mode of production can create more equitable results of social distribution and less economic inequality than the most social democratic capitalist countries with social welfare programs, then that will be the good start at then discussing whether or not- the socialist system can make the next historical leap towards a new qualitative social transformation beyond capitalism, and eventually capital? The worlds economic problems such as economic inequality and unequal wealth distributions, remains a natural development of the state of capital, and the proliferation of value and capital. Since the history of capitalism came birth from the primitive accumulations- and extraction of economic wealth from more resourceful countries. This basic premise in proliferating value for the sake of accumulating more value comes from peripheralizing of vast regions of the world, forced underdevelopment. The socialist countries like China and Vietnam where they were greatly impacted by colonial empires, like Britain and later the United Stares. They began their economic development very differently, in the sense that most of all of their economic development started from the backbones of their own exploitation first, and not building off the exploitation of everybody around you, first.
Socialism is when Destiny is a girl's name. 😔
How dare you make me laugh at that.
When the other guy defined capitalism after destiny already gave his opening statement, I started snoring
Great job
Btw half of his proposals are already in europe as natural evolution and politics. Healthcare, education, help for homeless and addicts if they just want it. We have huge pollution and environmental improvements in past decades. Everyone is treated fair and is safe in 99% of places and countries. Yet European people are called centrist and right wingers by American hardcore leftists and western media(LOL).
Social investments in capitalist environment is needed and good, help for people with needs/sick/out of poverty is widely seen as normal. Yet half of the world see us as slave owners of the majority of the world. We had painful history, and we created painful history, but now europe helps majority of countries and their people in Africa and Middle East. Yet they hate us and despite that move to Europe and remake their own countries mess in europe.
Socialism will never work as main driver of society and politics, cause people are different, people are good, evil, jealous, kind, hateful, racist, supportive. It's easier to control few bigger leaders or companies than massive 'socialist party' in millions when they went to wrong path and start to subjugate and exploit people. Cause most people don't want to be rulers, don't want to be leaders, give themselves to other people. People want to live good life, be happy, have healthy family and safety. People in power are just power hungry or people with believes that lower themselves to be in power. Nothing in between.
Trying to figure out if Destiny just has a big head by comparison to his opponent or does his opponent just have a pinhead? 🤔
Lol, I read this comment before even watching the video and now the whole time I’m just observing the difference in the size of their heads while they go at it. 🧐
01:30:00
That sounds a lot like that tale of two rabbits guy that had a debate with serfs lance, connor counterpoints, and lauren southern about the indigenous mass graves.
57:50,
Yo who ate all the beans!
I love how people think greed isn’t a traditional human trait and that people won’t find ways to game ANY fucking system they are placed within, including those implementing and enforcing the rules. You can’t negate human falacy, all systems will have breaks and loopholes regardless of what we feel like the ideal system is. It will be gamed to benefit some more than others.
Yea, I've been shutting socialists down with this for years.
Climate change, for instance. What would stop a group of like 100 people from deciding that they could make money much quicker by ignoring the damage they're doing to the environment, and vote to do it?
Honestly, the convo is starting to bore me, just because it often ends with "well, I'm not even really a socialist". Fucking lol.
@accelerationquanta5816
We already have that.
You missed the point of the question.
It’s easier to argue for socialism when you ignore human nature.
Excellent conversation.
my guy actually has my respect. He adressed the posuitives for caopatilsm and it not being evil, which is such a huge thing for todays world. He clearly is coming from a place of honesty and is open to being wrong. Very rare these days!
I've always found capitalism vs socialism to be a weird discussion topic. One is an economic system, while the other is somewhat of an economic system, but mostly a political system.
The discussion should be liberalism vs socialism.
I would argue that socialism, as debated in contexts like this, is largely an economic system but would require political movement. In other words, I think capitalism vs socialism is a more direct debate topic to what people actually care about as opposed to liberalism vs socialism.
This guy is smart, articulate and good faith in his arguments. What a refreshing piece of content.
That doesn’t make him correct
@@stuckinthemud4352who claimed he was correct? Ignorant ass comment.
The food market is one of the most regulated and subsidized, perhaps that's why overproduction occurs and perhaps food being a necessary element to survival effects the overproduction of food because we get a psychic benefit from having extra food.
Wow shoutout to this guy! Not snarky, honest, and actually says “I’m not sure”