Why do we need to have a thread about this person with +300 replies every month?
Yes, she's a liberal. Yes, she made an anti-capitalist video where she calls communism a thing when you have brutal dictators and blatantly misreads Marx like a leftoid where she identifies alienation as "having shitty jobs". Yes she is a bit of an odd character with a shady past, look her up on Kiwifarms.
He’s a liberal
Contra is a Pride-supporting fag, of course he's a liberal
You gonna stream your suicide on twitch?
Kiwifarms is retarded and even worse than infinite chan. At least the admin here has an excuse he's a literal potato
Did learn something in that thread. Hon is a slur trans use to say an unpassing MtF who just stereotypes women with dresses and hair.
So now when I say oh hon it's not just passive aggressive I'm destroying your typified identity. If you ask me this is more suitable for 90℅ of FtMs who think being a man just means being fat and not showering
It doesn't matter if she's a liberal or a megatankie or a 20th level spookbuster, what matters is that she's an eceleb and you should read a book instead of watching youtube videos.
Contrapoints is a liberal, an alcoholic and a member of the horrible """queer""" sex cult that wants to force themselves on others.
tfw no natalie blowjob
No, but as a trans person she has a vested interest in speaking up on gender issues and her content reflects that, I think she gets an undue amount of hate on this board just because she's a trans person, yes her take on alienation is sloppy but this board gives a free pass to other anti-dialectical ideologies too so it isn't fair to single her out for it.
To her credit, she does make rightwingers look stupid and even gets other anti-leftist opinontube channels like Eazyonme to acknowledge that she's persuasive and has shut up other big anti-sjw channels too afraid to take her on.
But at the same time, the hype around her channel feels out of touch with the public, she's lauded as though she's the answer to the right just because she reveals Ben Shapiro and The Golden One to be intellectually bereft demagogues and whilst it is a welcome to see someone humorously pick apart these hatemongers, she still represents a caricature of the left, being a bogeyman at worst who caters to a fawning audience of milquetoast liberal sycophants whilst vindicating the very reactionaries she plays off of.
Kiwifarms is just Something Awful 2.0
I'd hit it
People on /left*pol/ have had disagreements with contra before even she knew she was trans. That said her politics have definitely gotten more idpol since then presumably because of where she's been getting emotional support for the transition. Yeah some people dislike her for being trans (fuck em) but her politics have actually gotten worse.
I'll give her credit for being considerate of other opinions though. Most people who try to communicate these ideas to the same audience tend to be a lot angrier and insulting. IMO Natalie actually wants to change people's minds instead of entrench people further in opposition (which is what some activists seem to want, so they'll always have the "bad guys" to lecture and feel superior to). Unlike those people she's also cleary got enough of an open mind to recognize that stuff like gender identity is not settled psychology/sociology and there's a discussion worth having instead of merely a True dogma to preach. Wish she was a radical instead of a liberal cultire warrior though.
No, because literally anyone who tries their hand at leftist theory gets shit on by us: muke, finnishbolshevik, badmouse, etc. There's always a minority that likes them, and then a loud majority that spam their videos and twitter about how they're not a "real" leftist because they don't agree with the ideology of the month, then the video creator gets salty at all the negative comments and ragequits. Even people liked Bat'ko, who is mainly liked, mostly gave up and resorted to occasional meme videos because of the ungrateful community. I've considered doing a video series, but I've quoted works by Marx and Engels on Zig Forums and told that they don't count because Lenin/Stalin/Mao/Zizek/Whoever wrote something better. When a bunch of marxists tell you to fuck off for reading Marx, you know that trying to appeal to them is hopeless. This is the main reason I think Spectre Rouge failed, everyone knew if they spent hours working on a paper that we'd all just shit on them regardless of what they wrote.
Contrapoints never had a chance to appease our little boards, but at the same time I don't think she gives a fuck about us anyways.
You're a fucking idiot, FinnBol never really got dunked on here except for the incident with the NKVD rape fantasy, BadMouse got praise here for growing up ideologically and not being a anarcho-liberal anymore. Muke got rightfully shit on for being a condescending loudmouth sucking up to all kinds of liberals while knowing fuck all about the ideology he us promoting, Bat'ko did the same and turned full hurr durr SWERFs get the bullet type radlib.
Almost as if assholes and narcisstics are getting shit on and non-assholes are somewhat respected.
It wasn't just the alienation take that was horrid. She has not displayed any notion of actually knowing the philosophers she is referencing, it's all incoherent. She dropped out of university during her philosophy major, probably the reason why she knows nothing, instead, she blames it on "academia". Her attack on Blanchard implicitly calling him a pedophile is also uncalled for, just because she disagrees with his psychoanalytical analysis of gender dysphioria, the guy has been a lifelong advocate of trans rights, so bitch please. She also publicly disowned sh0eonhead because people thought it was "problematic" that she commented under her video, despite it being clear that Natalie/Nick does actually like sh0eonhead and was simply forced by her GamerGhazi echo chamber to do some struggle session. All this talk about gender and whatnot also bores me to death.
When he started out he was still relatively honest about how little he knew. Between then and now, his modesty went down without a corresponding growing pile of read books. "Highlights" of twitter muke are him dissing Cockshott without having read him and musing about how much he wished he could travel back in time to teach Lenin proper Marx. He's OK. Admitted to still having to learn much and took a break reading stuff. No, he has pissed away all and any credibility. But as shit as he is, I don't think he's guilty of even pretending to be a theorist of sorts. He's an opportunist who now does idpol shit for radlib clicks. Do you have any links to back that up?
Why are adults with more education than 90% of people so often, so childish? Is academia just a place for the types who want to be school children forever?
I'm not sure if any of you guys are aware but the Morningstar publishes amateur guest/freelance content, I know a few guys who have been published on there. Just ask them, I think you guys are more than qualified.
I thought that she leaned towards the psychological side of the debate, represented by the trans character in her video about TERFs.
I've watched some of her streams (Contrapoints Live on youtube) to try to get a feel for what kind of person she is. Apparently she sympathizes with both the idea that gender identity is inherent and that it's social. She says she thinks of her old self as male and her current self as female, for instance. It's pretty obvious that there are open questions about this and she acknowledges as much. On this topic she's probably more open minded having been inside the academic world and having seen that you should take state-of-the art knowledge with a grain of salt. Whereas, you know, as with many topics the people invested in identity issues try to find the most "respectful" positions and treat them as Fact.
Not saying who I am but right back you nblacks
Finnbol did nothing wrong. I don't kowtow to liberals so you can take my advice or just turn into liberals yourselves. Your choice.
Wow really? Because she sounds like a bog standard liberal. And its not because of her transgenderism. I think the most glaring one is her skit where she Catalonia the Antifa anarchist talks with a Limousine liberal. She pertty obviously sympathizes with the liberal point of view and kept admonishing the Anfia character about her inability to frame or communicate her message to liberals that would be sympathetic. She has a degree in philosophy but can't understand that liberals are capitalist and reject critiques not because they don't understand but because it undermines their self interest. Her other editorials are all stuff I've seen before. I think I caught actually getting a few details wrong on some history. She produces pandering trash.
He’s a guy.
Basques are the ones who need national liberation not Catalonia. Because they are actually a unique identity, not Catalans.
Yeah, it's because she doesn't get that antifa aren't trying to reach out to Well Intentioned Liberals and have The Discourse. Your brain on liberalism restricts your conception of political action to Talking It Out and voting. She doesn't get that antifa could give a fuck what she thinks of them, that they're there to have some direct effect, either breaking shit or intimidating cowardly far-right-wingers.
Also, she's not dumb, she just overestimates how much she knows. Someone should definitely push her to read some basic Marx because at the moment she seems to subscribe to the JBP idea of Marx as "equality of outcome" shit.
Based. Look at those faggots enabling the tranny.
That would do no good. The problem is not lack of knowledge here, the problem is that Contrapoints is financially dependent on the cult of intersectional liberals who use "equality of outcome" as a talking point. Contra is pulling in over a quarter of a million dollars annually from the GamerGhazi idpol set and they're already kicking their livers about when Contra dares stray slightly from their line. Contra would need to be insane to directly contradict them in such a manner.
Also, sage because radlib e-sleb.
No way, even YouTube creators that pull in millions of views don't make this.
7,694 patrons of patreon (Sauce: patreon.com/contrapoints ). The minimum tier is $2. Let's assume that all Contrapoints cash cows contribute the minimum amount.
The absolute bottom end of what Contra is possibly making is $184,656 per annum. I stand by my assertion that it's more likely to be a quarter of a mil.
Well shit. The problem here is also that anybody who tries to get into the youtube commentariat is liable to get the same group patronizing them and making them beholdened to their demands. How do you keep these faggots away if you're making lefty content, put a slur at the start of each video?
I think she's overall good for us, as she makes the "left" look sane. By the "left" I mean what dumb ass right-wingers and centrists think the "left" is. Which lowers the amount reactionaries we will have to deal with.
I stand corrected. In my defense I meant she couldn't be making a quarter million from YouTube ad revenue.
If you think about it it really isn't that impressive to make videos like this when you earn this much money. I don't think she's having to put more than two hours of work per day into her videos, which is just another instance of YouTuber being whiney bitches about the "effort" they are putting into their videos whereas your average Joe needs to make extra hours to come even close to that wage.
Contra's whole thing is how much effort goes into producing her videos.
2 things I gotta point out, she does put a significant amount of effort into her videos much more than other leftists and the rightwingers she's debunking. Have you seen a Paul Cockshott video? Or even Jason Unruhe or FinnishBolshevik? You really think her videos take just 2 hours to research, script, act, produce, edit etc?
Besides we shouldn't hold it against her for making a lot of money off her own work, socialism isn't about envy or austerity, it's (mostly) about ending wage labour parasitism (capital) so we can fully realise the value of our own labour, regardless of how worthwhile that labour may be. It only pays into the rights rhetoric of "making everyone equally poor".
Oh and she apparently has a new video out this week, I didn't watch her last video because I don't care for meme topics like "are traps gay?"
Nathaniel Faggot is certainly a liberal.
It's unfair to demean Roo for using a less elaborate video style than someone who puts out on or two videos a month. Roo pumps out something every 24 hours as a one-man operation. The simple truth is that the lack of available manpower and the short deadline is going to dictate the operation of his show in that regard.
Sage, because e-sleb
it just means she has a lot of loose money to spend. that's hardly prole.
colleges are indoctrination centers anyways.
Jason's low prod values are all part of his charm, as far as I'm concerned. He's Blank Reg's younger, better fed American cousin. youtu.be/HuConR5l0no
That's not the contention we ought to have with capitalism, capitalism is unjust, if all the proles were well paid it wouldn't justify the capitalists role in the system, we are not a cause for austerity.
I understand that Jason's news videos ie the daily videos that he puts out means that it's prohibitive for him to make them super flashy, but he has done in depth Marxist analysis/lecture videos on many topics which do not require that he churns them out as soon as possible, after all he has already made the great effort of referencing literature and data for those videos, it wouldn't hurt him to make them captivating for people who aren't already socialist. Badmouse and Hakim do a better job (even if Badmouse won't touch any equations) for those kind of videos, I don't find his lack of quality charming at all, if you've combed the comments for those videos you'll see people who've never seen or heard of him just disregarding his videos out of hand.
Even the most viewed sympathetic videos on Marxism aren't by anyone on breadtube, it pays to have high production propaganda, even Prager U understands this, they know ordinary liberals won't pay them any attention if Dennis Prager just stood in front of a bunch of static slides.
Here it is youtu.be/qtj7LDYaufM A good one, on (dark) humour. Pic unrelated to the video, but kind of related to the subject :Paul Garon "Blues and the Poetic Spirit"
richfags gtfo! If that doesn’t make her prole what the fuck does. Shes leterally two steps above trust fund kids by your logic. I mean sure trust funders have a lot of loose money but they aren’t fucking over any workers. Sooooooo they ain’t prole.
The accumulation of weath for any other reason other then to serve the greater good makes you prole regardless if you’re “fighting the good fight” otherwise you movment becomes a nifty way to make money. An that is exactly what is happening, again and again. You even have companys like Gillette and Pepsi taking moral stances to earn social justice good boy points. It’s a fucking misdirection trick don’t fall for it. Call out bullshit regardless of the persons political stances or if you like them or not. Just because Gillette or contrapoimts is “Woke” doesn’t mean they give a fuck about poor people for the people they take advantage of in the third world. And the fact she makes as much as she does and claims to be a socialist is bullshit. It needs to be called out.
What's so great about being poor? Can anyone explain this? I'm in precarious "self- employment" (gig economy work) myself. My working life is a constant hustle to earn as much money as possible. If I win big on the Premium Bonds one thing I certainly won't be doing is giving it to the poor, another is using it for "the greater good." It's not really about being poor, is it? Being poor is the problem. You not being authentic if you're poor. If you're poor exploitation still happens, youre just on the wrong end of it. I think Contrapoints videos are pretty entertaining. They're free to watch, anyway, it's patreon donations where she makes her money. You can watch the videos without paying anything. I don't think she's "claimed to be a socialist."
Contra may not be an ultrarevolutionary like you guys (haha) but she's socialist. Only an edgy armchair boi or cointelpro would say otherwise.
BTW, the "she's rich therefore liberal" argument is absolute Zig Forums-tier of political analysis.
The gig economy is a problem because it allows people to make insane amounts of money and go un checked in liberal circles. The gig economy is only accessible to the leisure class as a general rule. If you are surviving solely on donations. I can guarantee you that you don’t have children, or your parents or spouse support you to some extent at sometime past adulthood. I didn’t have an Internet connection or a computer until I was 20 I didn’t have a cell phone till I was 19. There are a few million people in the same predicament I was. So basically I didn’t have the option to get into the gig economy until I was 20 and then by the time I was 20 but by then I was working 60 hours a week to pay rent and save up for a car. I didn’t have a parent who could buy me a car I didn’t have anyone who could help me with rent. I was working a wage slave job for 60 hours, We’re 50% of my income was given to the government my landlord utility company and insurance company. If you have children this compounds the problem further especially for the working poor. When you work shit jobs you start to realize that everyone works two jobs. At the McDonald’s I worked at there were four people on my shift alone who worked two jobs because they had children.
If it isn’t clear now why contra points making 200+ K a year is a problem. Then let me spell it out for you she was only able to attain that wealth by being a product of the leisure class to some extent. If you were legitimately poor and paying your own way in life you don’t have the time to start a business without years of saving in advance Meaning she had help, plain and simple. There are millions of people who can’t take a day off work have zero help and are totally fucked. The people who have children and are in that situation are basically doomed. So while I can assure you her bourgeoisie lifestyle is probably fabulous and doesn’t fuck over workers. The accumulation of that level of wealth is in fact immoral because while she’s buying $30,000 cars and shit she doesn’t need that money could go to helping a child through University or give them something decent to eat and I while their parents some quality time with their children and instead of working 80 hours. Because guess what the gig economy is not available to everyone. Although it is astounding prevalent amoung rich an middle class kids larping as socialists. Who have the time and money to spend hours an hours building a business. You need to pay your dues otherwise you shouldn’t be calling yourself a socialist. I think Peter Singer made a pretty good point as far as wealth and why it’s a problem and this thought experiment.
technically she is a small business owner, especially if you count the people indirectly working for her via youtube
Then the lo-fi production values at Roo et al are a feature and not a bug
That all smacks of Stakhanovism to me, tbh. You seem to be making a virtue out of a horrible necessity (working all the hours to feed your kids, with no time to do anything else.) The "gig economy" refers to workers like Uber drivers. You can make ok money at these jobs, but only by working unsocial hours. In theory it let's you do other things, which you can organise your working life around. In practise, it's difficult to do that, because of the pressure to be on the road enough to earn enough money. I don't know if I should have described YouTube /Patreon as part of the "gig economy". It's different, in that you're not being offered a job of work which you either accept or decline.
Do they do this? What for? If I was rich I wouldn't be larping as a socialist. I'd be
buying my way on to archaeological digs in the hope of finding idols of the old gods Buying nice old style suits Buying cigars and whisky Visiting my friends who I haven't seen for ages, taking them to restaurants.
Then the lo-fi production values at Roo et al are a feature and not a bug.
Roo's heart is obv in the right place. I think the aesthetic is deliberate. It's like an old propaganda clips. If we had a communist dictator, Roo would look the part! Instead of giving commentary in the clips against a rickety-looking backdrop, he'd be out doing inspections like Kim Jong Un.
It doesn't matter. She will be cannibalized in year zero. Fair is fair.
You call that lo-fi? I call it capitalist poopee!
Contra is sane? Last time I checked chopping your dick….oh wait I forgot what board I was on.
It's all ecochamber shit Like how most of us don't watch rightwing youtubers for having a different point of view or engaging with their ideas The same goes for contrapoints ,no one but liberals and leftists watch her shit and it's not gonna do shit for changing or "converting" any significant amount of rightwingers Contra is just providing entertainment and validation to her viewers nothing more Same goes for every youtuber
I don't know about that… I watch Richard Spencer videos sometimes. It's a load of crap and half truths, but you do have to be careful not to get sucked in. (The only one where he seemed to be rattled was the one he did after his wife had been speaking to the press.) It's like one of the prosecutors at the Nuremberg trials said about Herman Goering, every so often he catches your eye with a sardonic look and you almost get taken in for a split second. That's why I think it's good there's some youtubers like Ms. Wynn, to pull you back on the side of the angels. Her video on whether traps are gay or not got 1M views! Suppose she did one on the Labour Theory of Value. Very people will look for a video on that, but they'd watch it cos it's her and they subscribe.
You just outed yourself as a normie in my book. Based on the fact that you a) have a car good enough for uber, b)got a loan for a car good enough for uber. I had to buy my care outright for 1.5k an its not good enough for uber. Leterally everyone i know who didn’t have a car given to them is in the same position
No, but theres no reason a childless single individual needs more then 50k a year
Heard conformity. A lot of us have made up our minds from years of getting fucked and working long hours. We where here before 2011 and before 2008. No one sold us our ideas we came up with them ourselves and found like minded people threw marx.
Other people are just here because its a fashion statement. They want to establish themselves as a mascot of communist perfection which usually entails spending hundreds of dollars a graphic T-shirts ripped jeans and stylish combat boots. It’s not surprising to me because every unique subculture eventually gets corrupted by the average people. I guess we kind of saw that with hipsters except for whatever reason they also decided to adopt communism or socialism to enhance their image. If you ever go to rallies Or get to know these people in real life. You will see this for yourself it’s disgusting and some with hilarious at the same time.
I don't believe you.
I think you got your ideas from watching Paul Joseph Watson videos.
Holy fuck mate lol. If you honestly knew who you where talking to you would be pretty embarrassed. I’ll avoid telling you when i / why i became a comunist for my own sake because it will leterally sound like bragging to you and your hobbiest ass would not believe it.
Seems we struck a nerve Projection much? Yes, believe it or not people are here for the right reasons an they have been here for 10, 20, sometimes 40 years. They reached there conclusions on there own. (Sometimes even in a vacuum) Before it go co opd by a bunch of fair weather rich college kids lowering marx to the level a fashion statement. Just because you may be a p-zombie hobbiest dont make the mistake of assuming everyone is as dishonest as you are. Holy fuuuck bro lol.
A lot of people on Zig Forums are deluded if they think Contrapoints is any less liberal than whatever labor-fetishism binge they're on.
That's a cop out, don't get blinded by your gatekeeping, try getting your friends and family members to watch any of these videos and see what they think.
The working class doesn't like dry substantive lectures, no matter how critical of importance they might be (have you ever switched the cafeteria TV to BBC Parliament during a lunch break at work?) , you need to give them a spectacle and preferably a song and dance too like that Oliver North skit out of American Dad for anybody to give just a little bit of a shit. A mass movement needs mass not a tiny bowel movement of elitest image board snobs.
That's silly, they all work for YouTube, Contra included, YouTube generates profits off all their labour. It's like saying the HR department in a business works for the janitors in the company because the janitors don't do their own staff payroll and accounting.
The only major substantial improvement that YouTube content creators have over regular proles are that they technically retain the commodity that they produce but it's a matter of coercion in that media aggregators like YouTube offer the same situation most workers have ie work or starve.
Have you even watched her videos? She literally watches and dissects popular right wingers, that's her thing, it didn't matter that she was a tranny (it's ancillary to the point that she's the right wing bogeyman personified), it's that she would go after people like the Golden One and Ben Shapiro whilst other leftist youtubers avoided confrontation unless it was getting ambushed in stupid worthless debates ie where the right would say one line of bullshit that takes several paragraphs of researched material to debunk.
The only echochamber element that I dislike about them that is an actual thing is their optimism, they are small fry in the sea of right wing ideology that pervades YouTube but they feel so self congratulatory at the end of their videos like they're the Power Rangers who've saved the day when it reality the war still wages and we're still losing on the defensive.
Let her try to dissect a Pol Potist. She will get thrown into a meat grinder and fed to jewish bankers as slop in the killing fields
The contrapoints argument: X says Y. Y has been used more broadly than how X sees it. Y has been used differently in the past than X uses it now; ergo, Y isn't real. That's all there's to it, she's a formulaic as Ben Shapiro.
Such peaceful times we live in, that a video of a girl playing dress up and saying someone else's video is dumb is talked about like a bloody gang vendetta.