CS Lewis described this contradiction we see in the vestiges of the new atheists today long in advance: "The reformer will remove the organ and demand the function."
@@properpolymath2097 Ah, but is it moist early life Hegel, or is it moist late-life Hegel, when he seemed to have decided that he knew everything there was to know?
Moist, is actually a pretty good word to use, if you want to be a troll. Apparently, somewhere between 10-30% of English speaking population, have a visual reaction to the word. Meaning every time they would read the name, you would troll them a little. Hegel? well, nobodies perfect. Many fall for his ideas, even if they do not work.
I think he makes some great points showing the similarities between the woke left and those on the right who are acting the same way. For example, just replace 'je w' with 'w hite' on X posts and you'll see there's very little difference between them. However, when he starts calling Tucker woke, or people who are against H1-B visa abuse woke, or young w hite people woke, who are discovering pride in their ancestors woke after years of seeing them maligned in recent yesrs, he loses me.
Honestly can’t wait to watch. The “woke-right” conversation has been breaking my brain and usually feels purposefully shifty, evasive and tactical to me. Lacks a directness .
@@maintaint3003 Because James is, at his core, an academic. The Neo Marxist left has controlled academia for more than a decade. James honestly believes that universities and the institution of the academy can be saved. He needs it to be saved. It has made him strange.
I was a yuge fan of Lindsay since day one, this sorry episode has made me lose all respect for him. I'm re-evaluating everything he's ever said. Now I see why I was always uneasy with his strategy of calling everything marxist
He wants a return to 1980’s liberalism. He ignores the 60 years of leftist destruction of many institutions and instead fights a fictional construct of the average traditional Christian. Very strange and disappointing.
I'm also a bit disappointed with his woke right focal shift. For a while, I thought maybe I was missing something. It's definitely a bummer, but we all mess something up now and then. In his defense, I must say that what he called the M-word was pretty accurate. I would know, because they groomed me in to their midst back when I first started taking early college courses for the then unnamed fast-track program that would eventually become known as Head Start.
I was a follower of Lindsay's work years past when i started following the people commonly called the DR on twitter just watching the way James behaved towards these people publicly made me re-evaluate him
@@jesse123185 I've never been particularly active on Twitter/X, but I've heard about a few of those tweets through the grapevine, and they had me shaking my head. I have no idea what may be going on in his life, but if his head is really up his rear... Well, he should be better than that, and I hope that he manages to redeem himself.
James already went off the deep end when he started bringing up Gnosticism for some reason. Just a bit off reading around occultism and esotericism makes me wonder how on earth he brought it up in the first place.
If your source was Esoterica just know he's a card carrying Marxist who recently admitted he structures his videos through a Marxist lense. Lindsays sources are Hennegraph, Voglin and McGee.
that's how he bought many conservative christians as "gnostic" is an evergreen bad word there.. little do they understand that he is hostile to any kind of belief in transcendent sacred..
Who is white? The rest of the world seems to know, but besides that it is people of european decent who identify or are identified as white. I saw myself as just American growing up, but the world decided to change that. I have a mixed european background and hate it when people ask me to identify with those various european peoples. You know how confusing and ridiculous that is? Also those people don't see me as them, so that is dumb. I am White American, it's a new thing, but it exists. Maybe we could call it European American if that helps. But to say I am a construct is $%^&ing annoying. The term was constructed, yes, it's original purpose wasn't ideal, but today in 2025 I can't imagine many people don't understand what white is.
As a person of Eurasian descent and origin, I find the term nonsensical. It can make sense from a folk ethnographic standpoint or if you subscribe to race realist theories, but the American idea of race has a lot of content it picked up due to the needs of the bureaucrat, as opposed to those of a scientist or a scholar. I'm not saying it doesn't make sense to you or that it shouldn't as it pertains to your immediate needs to approximately differentiate people, but the deeper you dig, the less sense it makes to distinguish ethnicity based on skin colour. And it's a destructive path in part because it makes certain rationalizations people make to justify collective mistreatment and the inflictment of collective punishment so easy and readily available. I'm not saying you want to engage in it, but many others will.
@@suspiciousentity9305Yea, it makes sense for me. America is new and its a mix. It would be nice to come up with a better term or just say American but that really doesn't work right now, because of all the people who still don't identify as just American. I have ancestry all over Europe, from western to eastern, even as far as Turkey so it makes no sense for me to try to identify with everything I am, especially since culturally I'm American.
"White" is a term for the Woke Left or Woke Right as it pertains to how a different collective can use it for their own power grab. Various European deScended "white" people killed each other over religious and political reasons (e.g. Quakers, Civil War), so there's no inherent white collective identity that really binds "whites" together as the Woke Right or Left would have us believe. Millions upon millions of "white," European descended people have voted for the Marxian social/public policies that threaten this nation today. Woke Right don't often bring that up, Woke Right don't bring up things like how the original versions of the KKK were against Roman Catholics. Woke Right don't like how many Evangelicals are big supporters of Zionism. A lot of the hard right still don't see Italians or Irish as "white." So, there will be predictable conflicts for a purity spiral if some group ever comes to power.
@@nacetroywhy is half your comment missing? Anyways... interesting. There is no woke right. The thing that I find funny when people try to dismantle the white identity is that they always have to explain to white people(people who identity as white and have never been associated with anything else) why they may not be white. Lol, had you not sat there and brought up long gone history to try to deconstruct something that was just fine, there would be no question. Its just weird. Even if you do deconstruct it there is no other term for us to call ourselves at this time that is accurate. On a side note, itallian roman catholics and irish were excluded for good reason at the time, they didn't fit in. Oh well. I don't think that is the case today even if it was its more about how they choose to identify themselves and how they act, I would think. A lot of italian Americans want to keep that identity, its up to them.
Many of the people of Northern Africa or South America are about as pale as Mediterranean Europeans. The whole "White" thing makes literally no sense at all as a designator of "race" or cultural heritage.
Before WWII it was common for various ethnic groups to marry within their ethnic group and even speak various languages. After WWII young people were told it was "un-American" to think themselves as a specific ethnicity or learn/speak a language other than English. This was a purposeful reformation of culture in the post WWII youth.
I have some sympathy for what Lindsay is trying to point out - but he’s being so clumsy and condescending about it. It’s embarrassing. And he’s hurting his position far more than helping it. Benjamin is approaching and engaging the position more thoughtfully.
If he was going after natzees and huwite supremacists, that would be totally fine. But he's deliberately using a broad brush to smear anyone who dares to disagree with him
Thanks to both for providing an enjoyable discussion but just two points: 1. Regarding busing, a certain community managed to obtain a lot of exceptions from that. 2. I think the guest may have some misconceptions about Evola and Guenon. They are really not white man's burden type people, as that is very much an anglosphere concept. Also although not part of it myself I understand those in the online right pagan sphere are not particularly in line with Guenon or Evola, even if they may utilise certain ideas from them. Guenon is a perennialist (as the guest alluded to later on) rather than a pagan as such and Evola's views on transcendence are fairly eclectic (and which actively critiqued fascism for its materialism and its plebeian nature).
I wish Ben would have a convos with Trent Horn and Joe Heschmeyer (at different dates)… Ben is such a curious interviewer, these 2 will be great conversations! 🥰🥰🥰🥰
@@allyourbase888 but the lady guest here is a monarchist, just the opposite. Now Hegel was also a monarchist. This makes Zizek a very confused person to me.
* Moist says she isn't comfortable being a leftist OR a fasc ist. * Moist is asked to define Fasci st. Doesn't. * Admits that the Neo Marxist left has attempted to dilute the term "fasci sm" to mean: Anything that calls for hierarchy rather than relies on radical egalitarianism. * Continues to use the term "fasci sm" in exactly this way.
46:01 Moist claims that the Australian government tried to genoci de the Australian Aboriginal people by trying breed them out. CITATION PLEASE. Being an Australian, and having studied this subject quite a bit, I'd *LOVE* to see a *single shred* of evidence to support this claim.
At 32:00 on 'fascism'. I imagine it might be helpful to appeal to Developmental frameworks (... Piaget, Robert Kegan, Ken Wilber etc..). For example, the governing structure of a family with children might be characterised as "fascist" (as "fascist" is defined in some left wing circles); individuals sitting somewhere on a developmental trajectory enroute to higher levels of maturity... Continuing around 39:00 I've imagined that "fascist" DEI is appropriate in governing an elementary school classroom; the problem is the infantilization of all of society (in which there exist individuals at higher levels of maturity).
The conceit of traditional liberalism is that humans can exist as individuals. They can't. Humans are always part of a (physical, local) community, and that community is part of several others, usually of increasing size all the way up to country. Humans *are* tribal. It is written into are DNA. It is a part of the very human condition. Without a group we literally die. Tribes have culture, and some cultures are better than others. Identity includes who we are and what groups we belong to. You can no more subtract that from a human than you can remove perception of space. We instantly would cease to function.
I am confused about the term fascist in this conversation. She says it is very similar to communism, but for the right instead of the left, and it is about meritocracy? Where can I read about this? I thought it was just a different flavor of communism; more joining of big corporations and government...
Can we just beef it out with James Lindsay and wokal? :( I like James. Maybe he's just been swimming in polluted water for too long. He needs to do some pure math for a holyday.
What I think gets missed out on the rift between James and the Lotus Eaters crowd is that the US and the UK have a very difference basis for their conceptualizations of citizenship. Frankly, there's been a push to make the UK a country that is more propositional in nature, only it probably has more of a connection to an internationalist idea as opposed to being a free country where people come to seek opportunity. It's been a case of seeking to disintegrate what was already there, as opposed to joining in on a societal experiment in a foreign land, to build it up and prosper. I see no sensible reason for James and the people at the Lotus Eaters to be in conflict, as they live in different states that might take different routes in their search for a more functional society. The way I see it, the Lotus Eaters have a crowd of American fans who sympathize with the more ethnonationalist flavours at the Lotus Eaters, while the people at the Lotus Eaters are also influenced by what is happening in the US on the right, but I seem to detect important confusions that take place along the way. The UK was more traditionally a commonwealth of subjects to a royal line, as opposed to a vision that one would associate with ethnonationalism. There has historically been an ethnonationalist and even a national socialist strain in the UK, but they didn't do so well. There were many nations among the previously mentioned subjects, on whose general perceptions on the world history has noticeably taken its course since the disintegration of the empire. But the point is: is there any sense in the people at the Lotus Eaters and James going to war, as opposed to accepting that they simply hold differing view for the futures of their respective countries? I find James is becoming more unreasonable over this, but is also probably identifying something that is worth being mindful of. Do they want to get locked in a conflict built out of what appears to be a great deal of prideful insecurity or work on the future of the world on their own turf? Personally, I would prefer neither vision to win out in my homeland, but I have no qualms with either one of the two sides having a vision for theirs, or attaining power, in their own countries. They'd own the results.
Carl and some of the Lotus eaters have, in my view, a stronger case to be more vigilant - b/c their demographics are under a bigger threat (mostly due to non-support by their own govt.), but more importantly, their govt. is farther down the Socialist-Fascist spectrum - - - and they have no Constitution. In other words, they're more f*cked than the US at them moment.
Why doesn't Benjamin have James Lindsay back on to sort out the "Woke Right" terminology? I was dubious about James' position but it seems quite obvious to me now.
@@Ammoniummetavanadate If there's a rift between Benjamin and Lindsay that bums me out. I always really enjoyed their conversations... I mean calmversations.
@Ammoniummetavanadate Because James has lost his mind and is blocking everyone, and then in podcasts labelling the most reasonable, rational and thoughtful people on the right, like Ben, or Carl, as 'Woke right' because he's desperate to be someone who coins the new socio-political term. I'd live him to come on and give his simple definition, but then that plays into his ego as if we must ask James the grand master of labels, what this new label actually encompasses. So instead, we'll continue listening to 18 different definitions of 'Woke right'when it's entirely unnecessary all around.
Can someone outline the Woke Right discussion that’s happening? Is it that there’s a contingent on the right that’s functioning like woke? What is that suggested to look like?
You have two sides. You have the people on the right, who complain about the Christian nationalists and Foundationalists, because they claim to be right wing, but they are just socialism again. Basically, they use all of the arguments of collectivism of Hegel. And they argue for 3rd positionism, proving they are not right wing, because the 3rd position, is not left or right, but a third. Proving they lied when they claimed to be right wing. And in response, these groups claimed that this is left wingers trying to police the right, because they do not like critic of Israel. Probably, because they have been controlled opposition from the start, and surprising many of them, claimed voting Trump was a bad idea. But some of them are just idiots, who follow other people they think are right wing. So you have Sargon thinking Dugin is right wing, when Dugin is 4th position, claiming not to be right left, or fascist, but a 4th position,,, that argue they can make socialism work, unlike the other groups. But, if woke is "about systems everything is sexist, everything is racist, everything is homophobic and you have to point it all out to everyone all the time" and thinking socialism is the solution. Then yes. You have people on "the right" who are woke. I would not consider them right wing, but they claim to be.
@achipinthesugar James is referring to Identity Politics from Christian and "white" groups who seem to want a state that supports and defends White Christian Nationalism. While the Carl Benjamin types may have a point with regards to European countries that are being altered by mass immigration the US is quite a different story. Personally I think more than half of the Identity rhetoric on both sides is driven by agent provocateurs and trolls.
Im sorry confused by woke right discussions because James seems to think Carl is woke right but Carl's views don't seem to meet anything I'd call woke even with the other conversations here
Carl think liberalism leads to socialism. The same argument Karl Marx used to say the free market would lead to socialism. Claims that have historically been proven false. It is not the liberal or capitalist nations that chose to become socialist first. It is anti liberal nations, like Tzar Russia, Imperial China, South America and Africa who keep choosing socialism. So, somebody convinced Carl that a reframed Karl Marx was correct. And, I can see why somebody who claim Marx was right, could be called woke. Even if they pretend to be right wing.
I’ll agree that the term “woke right” is ill defined and used in a very lazy way. At the same time I do believe it is often pointing to something that can be defined. So I’ll take a shot at it. “Woke” is not “identity politics”, it is a phenomenon that can appear in both “left” and “right” wing camouflage. The essence of woke is a strain of Marxist conflict theory as it specifically applies to politics. Conflict to obtain desired outcomes becomes the basis of interactions as opposed to rule bound competition or cooperation toward mutual benefit. Often the apparent, advertised conflict is a form of misdirection to distract from the corruption being carried out by those in power against those without.
You lost me at you can hear the tenor of someone’s soul in the way they present themselves. I think you guys are officially terminally online & not a good listen anymore due to the esoteric nonsense you seem to buy into
@ I should actually be careful right now because you’re prob reading into my soul via this exchange and finding a bottomless pit of hostility and darkness. Where my heart should be there is just a bunch of venomous snakes
RE: That WW2 podcaster who was on Tucker Carlson. (Sorry - I don't want to rewind to get his name) Here are three Hoover institute historians discussing it. It sounds to me like the guy got a hold of some sources of information that were based on Soviet propaganda and may have been inaccurate. I don't think he had bad motives and I disapprove of the elitist BS that these guys are spewing at points but, I think they explain what he got wrong accurately. ruclips.net/video/9PrzDICJ4Kk/видео.html
@ ..... and do you know WHY you won't get any luncheon meats? No bologna, no salami, no provolone. You are stuffed with sawdust, who will never drink wine or your stomach will explode.
As a left wing theist I still refuse to cede the term left to Atheist Liberals. The 80's and early 90's was all families on the left fighting for lower and middle class rights in largely religious communities. (In Aust and Britton) I have never understood the divide that the US political landscape has decided is the only way to view politics. Liberals are anything but when it comes to people who disagree with them.
Well, the left was on the side of the working class because it served them (the left). Now they don't need them anymore, quite the opposite. The left will use anything and anyone as a tool for power, to be cast aside when this tool is no longer fit for purpose. In my opinion.
Woke Right: "Woke Right" is a b.s. term!!!" Also Woke Right: models ideology on the same source as the Marxists, Hegel. The self-owns are hilarious. Listen to Thomas777, a self described Right Hegelian, to see where that thinking goes.
It's not hard: what's your position on Jews? That's *the* litmus test. The Woke Right is the part of the right that got really fast and loose ("just asking questions", "no enemies to the right") with attitudes to Jews and judaism after Oct 7th.
The attitude to Jews is that *they are not us* Maybe especially so for us in Europe. Jews are not of European Christian heritage. For most of their time in our lands they were completely separate from us. They are biologically and psychologically different, and they have religious and/or cultural motivations that are different to ours, and are often, more often and more deeply than many realise, at odds with our interests. To me this seems obvious and not at all hateful, but a lot of people seem to have serious trouble grasping and/or accepting it.
Benjamin, how dare you not title this" How the Woke Right misses the Marx"
You know what? Going with this. Good one, triskets!
@@BenjaminABoyce Woo! Made my night haha.
CS Lewis described this contradiction we see in the vestiges of the new atheists today long in advance: "The reformer will remove the organ and demand the function."
Call everything woke until you control it
Which is funny because it's the controls that are at the heart of woke and rebelling against it.
"Moist Hegel"? These internet hipster names are getting worse and worse
@@properpolymath2097 Ah, but is it moist early life Hegel, or is it moist late-life Hegel, when he seemed to have decided that he knew everything there was to know?
Moist, is actually a pretty good word to use, if you want to be a troll.
Apparently, somewhere between 10-30% of English speaking population, have a visual reaction to the word.
Meaning every time they would read the name, you would troll them a little.
Hegel? well, nobodies perfect. Many fall for his ideas, even if they do not work.
@@haraldbredsdorff2699I think you meant “visceral reaction.”
the Geist with the moist!
15:06 WATCH IT buddy! 🤨
Your pall James Lindsey will have some choice words for you if he hears this… 🤭🤣🤣🤣
She's very smart. Learned a lot listening to her.
yeah, she was great
I wanna thank Asmongold for making it possible to raise awareness about Moist Critical Theory
Asmongold is great
I find it extremely hard to care a single bit about the term woke right. Call me what you please, it doesn't change what i want or whats right.
James Lindsey has really crapped the bed with this one. 😅
I think he makes some great points showing the similarities between the woke left and those on the right who are acting the same way.
For example, just replace 'je w' with 'w hite' on X posts and you'll see there's very little difference between them.
However, when he starts calling Tucker woke, or people who are against H1-B visa abuse woke, or young w hite people woke, who are discovering pride in their ancestors woke after years of seeing them maligned in recent yesrs, he loses me.
I got bored of Lindsay awhile back
Just as disappointingly, so has Konstantin Kisin. We are seeing a lot of people showing their true colors.
Dry Nietzche could fix her I reckon.. now that's a hard man..
Honestly can’t wait to watch. The “woke-right” conversation has been breaking my brain and usually feels purposefully shifty, evasive and tactical to me. Lacks a directness .
You just described Konstantin perfectly.
Excellent conversation, thanks!
I could go multiple lifetimes without hearing the damn term "one shotted" ever again.
I’m sick of the “woke right” discussion. Something about it doesn’t make sense to me.
A few things on the right are bothering me now.. boring me too
Vocal fry was a mistake.
my xtwitter ideology is whoever makes me laugh most. lindsay has become lolcow.
poor James.. the left won't ever take him back, the right laughs at him.. all alone in this cold world..
that's the most admirable place to be
James is the shit. Meaning he is the man. Meaning I like him and he is smart.
"Left won't ever take him back..." what the...
*Why would you go back?!?*
Thinking you need to be on the ‘right’ or ‘left’ is a problem in the first place. The right vs left bs only hurts progress
@@maintaint3003 Because James is, at his core, an academic. The Neo Marxist left has controlled academia for more than a decade. James honestly believes that universities and the institution of the academy can be saved. He needs it to be saved. It has made him strange.
Very brainiac, interesting and original viewpoints. I like it.
I was a yuge fan of Lindsay since day one, this sorry episode has made me lose all respect for him. I'm re-evaluating everything he's ever said. Now I see why I was always uneasy with his strategy of calling everything marxist
He wants a return to 1980’s liberalism. He ignores the 60 years of leftist destruction of many institutions and instead fights a fictional construct of the average traditional Christian.
Very strange and disappointing.
I'm also a bit disappointed with his woke right focal shift. For a while, I thought maybe I was missing something. It's definitely a bummer, but we all mess something up now and then.
In his defense, I must say that what he called the M-word was pretty accurate. I would know, because they groomed me in to their midst back when I first started taking early college courses for the then unnamed fast-track program that would eventually become known as Head Start.
I was a follower of Lindsay's work years past when i started following the people commonly called the DR on twitter just watching the way James behaved towards these people publicly made me re-evaluate him
I dunno, his podcasts are still S tier
@@jesse123185 I've never been particularly active on Twitter/X, but I've heard about a few of those tweets through the grapevine, and they had me shaking my head. I have no idea what may be going on in his life, but if his head is really up his rear... Well, he should be better than that, and I hope that he manages to redeem himself.
James already went off the deep end when he started bringing up Gnosticism for some reason. Just a bit off reading around occultism and esotericism makes me wonder how on earth he brought it up in the first place.
If your source was Esoterica just know he's a card carrying Marxist who recently admitted he structures his videos through a Marxist lense.
Lindsays sources are Hennegraph, Voglin and McGee.
because he found it in Marx's early work?
that's how he bought many conservative christians as "gnostic" is an evergreen bad word there.. little do they understand that he is hostile to any kind of belief in transcendent sacred..
@@TessaTickleno he didnt
I love esotericism and occultism. I dont get why he brought it up either.
“Moist Hegel” is so Zoomer and gross at the same time… I love it… 🤣🤣🤣
She’s got a great future ahead… 🥰🥰🥰
Who is white? The rest of the world seems to know, but besides that it is people of european decent who identify or are identified as white. I saw myself as just American growing up, but the world decided to change that. I have a mixed european background and hate it when people ask me to identify with those various european peoples. You know how confusing and ridiculous that is? Also those people don't see me as them, so that is dumb. I am White American, it's a new thing, but it exists. Maybe we could call it European American if that helps. But to say I am a construct is $%^&ing annoying. The term was constructed, yes, it's original purpose wasn't ideal, but today in 2025 I can't imagine many people don't understand what white is.
As a person of Eurasian descent and origin, I find the term nonsensical. It can make sense from a folk ethnographic standpoint or if you subscribe to race realist theories, but the American idea of race has a lot of content it picked up due to the needs of the bureaucrat, as opposed to those of a scientist or a scholar. I'm not saying it doesn't make sense to you or that it shouldn't as it pertains to your immediate needs to approximately differentiate people, but the deeper you dig, the less sense it makes to distinguish ethnicity based on skin colour. And it's a destructive path in part because it makes certain rationalizations people make to justify collective mistreatment and the inflictment of collective punishment so easy and readily available. I'm not saying you want to engage in it, but many others will.
@@suspiciousentity9305Yea, it makes sense for me. America is new and its a mix. It would be nice to come up with a better term or just say American but that really doesn't work right now, because of all the people who still don't identify as just American. I have ancestry all over Europe, from western to eastern, even as far as Turkey so it makes no sense for me to try to identify with everything I am, especially since culturally I'm American.
"White" is a term for the Woke Left or Woke Right as it pertains to how a different collective can use it for their own power grab. Various European deScended "white" people killed each other over religious and political reasons (e.g. Quakers, Civil War), so there's no inherent white collective identity that really binds "whites" together as the Woke Right or Left would have us believe. Millions upon millions of "white," European descended people have voted for the Marxian social/public policies that threaten this nation today. Woke Right don't often bring that up, Woke Right don't bring up things like how the original versions of the KKK were against Roman Catholics. Woke Right don't like how many Evangelicals are big supporters of Zionism. A lot of the hard right still don't see Italians or Irish as "white." So, there will be predictable conflicts for a purity spiral if some group ever comes to power.
@@nacetroywhy is half your comment missing? Anyways... interesting. There is no woke right. The thing that I find funny when people try to dismantle the white identity is that they always have to explain to white people(people who identity as white and have never been associated with anything else) why they may not be white. Lol, had you not sat there and brought up long gone history to try to deconstruct something that was just fine, there would be no question. Its just weird. Even if you do deconstruct it there is no other term for us to call ourselves at this time that is accurate. On a side note, itallian roman catholics and irish were excluded for good reason at the time, they didn't fit in. Oh well. I don't think that is the case today even if it was its more about how they choose to identify themselves and how they act, I would think. A lot of italian Americans want to keep that identity, its up to them.
Many of the people of Northern Africa or South America are about as pale as Mediterranean Europeans. The whole "White" thing makes literally no sense at all as a designator of "race" or cultural heritage.
Hard to have this as background noise, it was a very engaging conversation!
She seems mentally unwell.
Before WWII it was common for various ethnic groups to marry within their ethnic group and even speak various languages. After WWII young people were told it was "un-American" to think themselves as a specific ethnicity or learn/speak a language other than English. This was a purposeful reformation of culture in the post WWII youth.
Was not expecting a show today, so a bit of catch up crew needed for Kitty 🐈
Hey Kitty, I second this some one want to catch us up on this dialogue?
I missed a few months of calmversations I was travelling.
I have some sympathy for what Lindsay is trying to point out - but he’s being so clumsy and condescending about it. It’s embarrassing. And he’s hurting his position far more than helping it. Benjamin is approaching and engaging the position more thoughtfully.
If he was going after natzees and huwite supremacists, that would be totally fine. But he's deliberately using a broad brush to smear anyone who dares to disagree with him
Thanks to both for providing an enjoyable discussion but just two points:
1. Regarding busing, a certain community managed to obtain a lot of exceptions from that.
2. I think the guest may have some misconceptions about Evola and Guenon. They are really not white man's burden type people, as that is very much an anglosphere concept. Also although not part of it myself I understand those in the online right pagan sphere are not particularly in line with Guenon or Evola, even if they may utilise certain ideas from them. Guenon is a perennialist (as the guest alluded to later on) rather than a pagan as such and Evola's views on transcendence are fairly eclectic (and which actively critiqued fascism for its materialism and its plebeian nature).
Moist's smart but like please like take like a speech class
I wish Ben would have a convos with Trent Horn and Joe Heschmeyer (at different dates)… Ben is such a curious interviewer, these 2 will be great conversations! 🥰🥰🥰🥰
She looks like a Rachel or a Stella. I love guessing names.
She’s my X homie
She’s really adorable:)
She's 25?
Damn rough 20s huh.
Idk who she is, but I wouldn't say she looks rough for 25
Benjamin u would make a nice hegelian e-girl..
He's alt-maxing, no doubt about that.
lol
That podcast with him, Sargon and Lindsay was real trinity shit
I am impressed with this young lady but not sure if any of this kind of discussion is good for me. Need to take a break from politics and internet.
Why did she transition to Hegel? I liked it better when she was a critic of Hegel. Now if that's what she means by Dark Hegel, cool i.e. "moist".
"moist" = feminine in eastern philosophy
@Gingerblaze hegel was not a so-called Eastern philosopher.
@@grosbeak6130 Commie Zizek claims to be a Hegelian.
@@allyourbase888 but the lady guest here is a monarchist, just the opposite. Now Hegel was also a monarchist. This makes Zizek a very confused person to me.
Really interesting guest!
* Moist says she isn't comfortable being a leftist OR a fasc ist.
* Moist is asked to define Fasci st. Doesn't.
* Admits that the Neo Marxist left has attempted to dilute the term "fasci sm" to mean: Anything that calls for hierarchy rather than relies on radical egalitarianism.
* Continues to use the term "fasci sm" in exactly this way.
That's one impressive dame! I would love to see her and Dave Greene have a chat.
46:01 Moist claims that the Australian government tried to genoci de the Australian Aboriginal people by trying breed them out. CITATION PLEASE.
Being an Australian, and having studied this subject quite a bit, I'd *LOVE* to see a *single shred* of evidence to support this claim.
At 32:00 on 'fascism'. I imagine it might be helpful to appeal to Developmental frameworks (... Piaget, Robert Kegan, Ken Wilber etc..). For example, the governing structure of a family with children might be characterised as "fascist" (as "fascist" is defined in some left wing circles); individuals sitting somewhere on a developmental trajectory enroute to higher levels of maturity... Continuing around 39:00 I've imagined that "fascist" DEI is appropriate in governing an elementary school classroom; the problem is the infantilization of all of society (in which there exist individuals at higher levels of maturity).
On a different note, I don't agree with her on a number of things, but this was interesting. I hope Benjamin has her on again in the future.
The conceit of traditional liberalism is that humans can exist as individuals. They can't. Humans are always part of a (physical, local) community, and that community is part of several others, usually of increasing size all the way up to country.
Humans *are* tribal. It is written into are DNA. It is a part of the very human condition. Without a group we literally die. Tribes have culture, and some cultures are better than others. Identity includes who we are and what groups we belong to. You can no more subtract that from a human than you can remove perception of space. We instantly would cease to function.
I am confused about the term fascist in this conversation. She says it is very similar to communism, but for the right instead of the left, and it is about meritocracy?
Where can I read about this?
I thought it was just a different flavor of communism; more joining of big corporations and government...
Great discussion
Can we just beef it out with James Lindsay and wokal? :( I like James. Maybe he's just been swimming in polluted water for too long. He needs to do some pure math for a holyday.
Wokal and James had a falling out?
What I think gets missed out on the rift between James and the Lotus Eaters crowd is that the US and the UK have a very difference basis for their conceptualizations of citizenship. Frankly, there's been a push to make the UK a country that is more propositional in nature, only it probably has more of a connection to an internationalist idea as opposed to being a free country where people come to seek opportunity. It's been a case of seeking to disintegrate what was already there, as opposed to joining in on a societal experiment in a foreign land, to build it up and prosper. I see no sensible reason for James and the people at the Lotus Eaters to be in conflict, as they live in different states that might take different routes in their search for a more functional society. The way I see it, the Lotus Eaters have a crowd of American fans who sympathize with the more ethnonationalist flavours at the Lotus Eaters, while the people at the Lotus Eaters are also influenced by what is happening in the US on the right, but I seem to detect important confusions that take place along the way. The UK was more traditionally a commonwealth of subjects to a royal line, as opposed to a vision that one would associate with ethnonationalism. There has historically been an ethnonationalist and even a national socialist strain in the UK, but they didn't do so well. There were many nations among the previously mentioned subjects, on whose general perceptions on the world history has noticeably taken its course since the disintegration of the empire. But the point is: is there any sense in the people at the Lotus Eaters and James going to war, as opposed to accepting that they simply hold differing view for the futures of their respective countries? I find James is becoming more unreasonable over this, but is also probably identifying something that is worth being mindful of. Do they want to get locked in a conflict built out of what appears to be a great deal of prideful insecurity or work on the future of the world on their own turf? Personally, I would prefer neither vision to win out in my homeland, but I have no qualms with either one of the two sides having a vision for theirs, or attaining power, in their own countries. They'd own the results.
Carl and some of the Lotus eaters have, in my view, a stronger case to be more vigilant - b/c their demographics are under a bigger threat (mostly due to non-support by their own govt.), but more importantly, their govt. is farther down the Socialist-Fascist spectrum - - - and they have no Constitution. In other words, they're more f*cked than the US at them moment.
@@nacetroyOne might even go as far as to say, royally fucked.
More zooms than the Mazda commercial... *yeah* you know the one ;p
Why doesn't Benjamin have James Lindsay back on to sort out the "Woke Right" terminology?
I was dubious about James' position but it seems quite obvious to me now.
I think there is a bit of a rift there right now.
Unless I am reading too deeply into a few twitter interactions.
@@Ammoniummetavanadate If there's a rift between Benjamin and Lindsay that bums me out. I always really enjoyed their conversations... I mean calmversations.
@jamesbeach7405 Thanks for the response. I agree. Their calmversations were my favorite on this channel.
@Ammoniummetavanadate Because James has lost his mind and is blocking everyone, and then in podcasts labelling the most reasonable, rational and thoughtful people on the right, like Ben, or Carl, as 'Woke right' because he's desperate to be someone who coins the new socio-political term.
I'd live him to come on and give his simple definition, but then that plays into his ego as if we must ask James the grand master of labels, what this new label actually encompasses. So instead, we'll continue listening to 18 different definitions of 'Woke right'when it's entirely unnecessary all around.
Lindsay has a very very thin skin. He is literally the woke right himself.
Saying there are no differences is like price fixing. It doesn't work, so you apply force to try to make it happen anyway.
Can someone outline the Woke Right discussion that’s happening? Is it that there’s a contingent on the right that’s functioning like woke? What is that suggested to look like?
I woke is being enlightened then the right woke is religion.
"woke" right looks like Wu
Woke Right is a term of manipulation that corporate and liberal types use to curtail actual conservatives
You have two sides.
You have the people on the right, who complain about the Christian nationalists and Foundationalists, because they claim to be right wing, but they are just socialism again.
Basically, they use all of the arguments of collectivism of Hegel.
And they argue for 3rd positionism, proving they are not right wing, because the 3rd position, is not left or right, but a third.
Proving they lied when they claimed to be right wing.
And in response, these groups claimed that this is left wingers trying to police the right, because they do not like critic of Israel.
Probably, because they have been controlled opposition from the start, and surprising many of them, claimed voting Trump was a bad idea. But some of them are just idiots, who follow other people they think are right wing. So you have Sargon thinking Dugin is right wing, when Dugin is 4th position, claiming not to be right left, or fascist, but a 4th position,,, that argue they can make socialism work, unlike the other groups.
But, if woke is "about systems everything is sexist, everything is racist, everything is homophobic and you have to point it all out to everyone all the time" and thinking socialism is the solution.
Then yes. You have people on "the right" who are woke.
I would not consider them right wing, but they claim to be.
@achipinthesugar James is referring to Identity Politics from Christian and "white" groups who seem to want a state that supports and defends White Christian Nationalism. While the Carl Benjamin types may have a point with regards to European countries that are being altered by mass immigration the US is quite a different story. Personally I think more than half of the Identity rhetoric on both sides is driven by agent provocateurs and trolls.
Wait.. so by todays definition of Woke Right, doesnt that make Konstantin Kisin and Janes Lindsey, PEAK Woke Right?
@@realMaverickBuckley nope
Can you give a source for _today's definition?_
Zoomer representation present
Im sorry confused by woke right discussions because James seems to think Carl is woke right but Carl's views don't seem to meet anything I'd call woke even with the other conversations here
Because James is using that term as a weapon to smear anyone who disagrees with him that LIBERALISM UBER ALLES
Which is exactly why nobody should give the name weight. It means nothing.
Carl think liberalism leads to socialism.
The same argument Karl Marx used to say the free market would lead to socialism.
Claims that have historically been proven false.
It is not the liberal or capitalist nations that chose to become socialist first.
It is anti liberal nations, like Tzar Russia, Imperial China, South America and Africa who keep choosing socialism.
So, somebody convinced Carl that a reframed Karl Marx was correct.
And, I can see why somebody who claim Marx was right, could be called woke.
Even if they pretend to be right wing.
spot on
What was her name when she did her first interview? I can’t remember it offhand.
Seventeen minutes in and i think to complement the talent scout for the scouting. And the effort to clarify the talent's particular phrasing.
Its a condemnation of our society that such a pretty girl has gone this far down the political theory rabbit hole.
I’ll agree that the term “woke right” is ill defined and used in a very lazy way. At the same time I do believe it is often pointing to something that can be defined. So I’ll take a shot at it. “Woke” is not “identity politics”, it is a phenomenon that can appear in both “left” and “right” wing camouflage. The essence of woke is a strain of Marxist conflict theory as it specifically applies to politics. Conflict to obtain desired outcomes becomes the basis of interactions as opposed to rule bound competition or cooperation toward mutual benefit. Often the apparent, advertised conflict is a form of misdirection to distract from the corruption being carried out by those in power against those without.
You lost me at you can hear the tenor of someone’s soul in the way they present themselves. I think you guys are officially terminally online & not a good listen anymore due to the esoteric nonsense you seem to buy into
I work with lots of people off line. It's something that I pick up. Of course most people aren't sensitive to it. No judgment from me.
@ I’m sure you are really a magic people whisperer who can read into their souls with your special sensitivities
@ I should actually be careful right now because you’re prob reading into my soul via this exchange and finding a bottomless pit of hostility and darkness. Where my heart should be there is just a bunch of venomous snakes
@Sas1256x I gathered as much, simply through scanning your word choice. There’s hope for you yet, brother.
@@BenjaminABoyce it’s sister
RE: That WW2 podcaster who was on Tucker Carlson. (Sorry - I don't want to rewind to get his name) Here are three Hoover institute historians discussing it. It sounds to me like the guy got a hold of some sources of information that were based on Soviet propaganda and may have been inaccurate. I don't think he had bad motives and I disapprove of the elitist BS that these guys are spewing at points but, I think they explain what he got wrong accurately. ruclips.net/video/9PrzDICJ4Kk/видео.html
😊
"You wont get any 🍖. Do you know why you won't get any 🍖" -The Great Crowelli 🙀
@NinjaKittyBonks Vorelli would put you in a puppet body for spelling his name that way!
@ ... "Crowelli will not give you any ham and you will remain imprisoned until you recognize Crowelli's greatness
@NinjaKittyBonks 🤯
@ ..... and do you know WHY you won't get any luncheon meats? No bologna, no salami, no provolone. You are stuffed with sawdust, who will never drink wine or your stomach will explode.
As a left wing theist I still refuse to cede the term left to Atheist Liberals. The 80's and early 90's was all families on the left fighting for lower and middle class rights in largely religious communities. (In Aust and Britton) I have never understood the divide that the US political landscape has decided is the only way to view politics.
Liberals are anything but when it comes to people who disagree with them.
Well, the left was on the side of the working class because it served them (the left). Now they don't need them anymore, quite the opposite. The left will use anything and anyone as a tool for power, to be cast aside when this tool is no longer fit for purpose. In my opinion.
If you put together the Google AI with the X AI you will get the omega schizo.
Woke Right: "Woke Right" is a b.s. term!!!" Also Woke Right: models ideology on the same source as the Marxists, Hegel. The self-owns are hilarious. Listen to Thomas777, a self described Right Hegelian, to see where that thinking goes.
4 minutes in no idea of what this is about
It's not hard: what's your position on Jews? That's *the* litmus test. The Woke Right is the part of the right that got really fast and loose ("just asking questions", "no enemies to the right") with attitudes to Jews and judaism after Oct 7th.
Not quite, you are confused.
The attitude to Jews is that *they are not us*
Maybe especially so for us in Europe. Jews are not of European Christian heritage. For most of their time in our lands they were completely separate from us. They are biologically and psychologically different, and they have religious and/or cultural motivations that are different to ours, and are often, more often and more deeply than many realise, at odds with our interests. To me this seems obvious and not at all hateful, but a lot of people seem to have serious trouble grasping and/or accepting it.
@joer9156 as a statement of fact, I agree. When in a stable environment, however, we can happily co-exist. I am fine with that.