I have some spare time, so why not. Video in question: youtube.com/watch?v=sgEmxi7wc0k That's actually pretty cool, and good for her. This will come up later. Moralism is a classic problem for Marxists. It is good that you have morals, that you are motivated by them, but it is not our ultimate point of departure or main guide in political thinking. At least for Marxists. What kind of meat, under what exact socio-economic system? Surely we agree that these are crucial factors. Also of note is the typical ideological move under capitalism: individualization of social problems. For a Marxists "raising awareness about meat" and personally stopping eating meat is not a real solution to unsustainability, animal cruelty, etc. Mexie has to know this if she reads Harvey, for example. "If only everybody acted in a certain way" (which is almost always: my way – hence moralism) is an essentially non-systemic way of thinking, and one should add: apolitical. I haven't, but from wiki: "the scientific consensus is that livestock contribute 15% of global greenhouse gas emissions - far lower than the 51% claimed by the film." Moreover, and this is where it becomes from manipulative to outright harmful: "Movies like Cowspiracy aren’t believable, not only because of how they twist the science, but also because of what they ask us to believe: that the fossil fuel industry—the ExxonMobils of the world—aren’t the main cause of global warming… and that thousands of scientists have covered up the truth about the most important environmental issue of our time." But let's add, that "Cowspiracy co-director Keegan Kuhn defended the 51% figure featured in the documentary, pointing to a 2012 article in the journal Animal Feed Science and Technology. In that article, Goodland and Anhang addressed criticism of their study, and explained their methodology." Even if a minority of scientist (about which I am personally skeptical since a topic deeply interwoven with moralism and individualized consumer ideology should raise any Marxist's alarm bells) defend the 51% figure while the majority do not, presenting it as a fact, rather than a scientific dispute is manipulation pure and simple. Not a good start in terms of sources. Sure, why not, and read criticisms of it, because there should be aplenty. If you want to defend veganism from an ethical standpoint take my advice: don't refer to a literal cult. Seriously, look them up. I, for instance, am rather critical of the biopolitics of psychiatry. I would NEVER refer to Scientology, even though they are too, in their own crazy way, since I'd offer my opponents a free score. There are plenty ethic books, ethic profs that can give you better arguments than PETA. Note: so far we had a(t best a slightly) manipulative docu and crazy people. NOT a good start. You are not making your case any better. Let us note that the expression used refers to murder of a fellow human being. Surely we would all agree (some PETA people wouldn't!) that killing a human is not the same as killing a chicken for consumption. Not ethically, not pragmatically, not theologically, not anyway.
The same could be said about capitalist mega farms where tons of highly toxic shit is used, copyrighted gene modified crops fucks over ordinary folks, the soil is ruined in under a decade. Under feudalism agriculture was more sustainable, for instance. Socialists would argue that we can do better. Same thing with meat. This is obviously false. Take for instance: the dangerous levels of over-fishing around the world. If you don't catch more fish than what naturally reproduces, it is incredibly sustainable. You have to irrigate plants, fertilize them, provide the optimal soil and general environment. If you eat plants, you consume something that consumed something else and so on. Granted, a lot more goes into a single cow, granted, again, we are currently ridiculously unsustainable, but you can not make such a general sweeping statement. What about the control of overpopulated wildlife, on the other hand? Biologists would argue it is good that we have croc hunting seasons and deer hunting seasons in environments where they don't have natural enemies. Otherwise the deer would overpopulate and consume all of its sustaining flora and it would be fucked. Why not hunt them, every year, for a month? If it's good for the deer population, and good for us, I see no other counter argument than (for me) dubious ethical claims, on which you couldn't really sway me. Just a note: there are biologists trying to change cow's intestinal bacteria to reduce or completely stop their methane production. There are also other kinds of animals we eat which have close to none methane output. Again, just to put Mexie's "we can't do better" opinion into perspective. >07:50 Mexie: it is not economical to raise them on pastures, hence feeding cow with soy Economical under what economic system? Again, freaking Marxism. Socialism is economical differently than capitalism or primitive communism.
Insects are a good source of protein, so are fish, and other animals living in the waters
Jacob Lewis
I have nothing to add, "because animals." I could go on about how economically unsustainable and overproduced wine is, actually, since it requires ridiculous amounts of water, pesticide, etc. while being an unessential (harmful, even) product. There's actually quite a lot of science behind this. Let it suffice for now, that you are an omnivore, and omnivores crave what omnivores need to eat in order to function biologically. Meat tastes fucking amazing to everybody, because your body is telling you that you should devour that shit like right now. I know that some people after enough mental gymnastics actually can not stand it, but. you. are. an. omnivore. You crave as an omnivore. I don't know. If oveproducing a non-essential and harmful foodstuff like wine in regions where there are already water shortages, why don't we make it illegal? Why don't we make golf courses illegal in these same areas. I think you know the answer.
You know what I meant by marine wildlife you cheeky bastards
Colton Anderson
A definition has no bearing on the thing itself. I could do A and call it B, but my speech act doesn't transform my action A into B. For a Marxist veganism is not more political than abstinence is, since we view both (alcoholism-abstinence; capitalist meat horror-veganism) as subgroups of a system with specific characters that determine the nature of these subgroups as well. Let's be honest here. Vegan lifestyle is unaffordable even for your regular US worker whose cheap, big, and fast meals are bought at fast food restaurants. Similarly as with the "bloodied hand" point before: there's a dangerous obfuscation at work here. We are (supposedly) in a radical leftist environment, and you've just used one of our core terms (exploitation of labor) referring to animals. Don't do that, because terminology matters. Call it mistreatment. I don't care. People are exploited differently than nature is – some would argue that the exploitation of nature is impossible in itself. (Nature is not a Big Other, we are on a fucking flying rock, our main problem is our survival, which is unfortunately tied to a dumb rock. But this would lead us elsewhere.) STOP IT. This is harmful. Just because you use anti-capitalist phraseology it doesn't make your point automatically pass in anti-capitalist circles. Human lives are commodified on the job market. We are doing it to ourselves. Workers being commodities is a TOTALLY different phenomenon than cows ending up in butcher shops. There was meat consumption BEFORE the commodity form, unlike with the commodification of the workforce. STOP IT. YOU COME OFF AS DISHONEST AND MANIPULATIVE FOR A MARXIST.
This is not politics for a Marxist. I can tell you off the bat that If I only eat fish I catch for a week and you eat only grain that you sowed, fertilized, watered, etc. I'm doing better than you. Then there's insects. No vegan product can beat it, sorry. Again, undifferentiation is an ideological move on Mexie's part. This is an indirect proof that for most vegans the "bloc of meat eaters" is essentially a moral category, rather than economic. Not Marxist. >11:40 M: We have to collectively start understanding that we can't keep doing this and just going to the store and just buying the same things all the time Here's a problem, at least for a Marxist. There's no collective of consumers, really. Again, I feel this is the above mentioned trick of putting anti-capish sounding words on basically liberal understanding of things. I'm not saying it's intentional on Mexie's part, I think she doesn't know. There is liberal veganism, that doesn't want to touch capitalism, correct? You can't say the same for Marxism. The meat-horror is just a very tiny fragment of what's fucked up with capitalism, as we all know. Most Marxist would say that it's insignificant compared to the general horror of market distribution, waged labor, and so on. Yes, yes you can, in fact the majority of vegans are not even-anticapitalist (which is pretty meaningless a term in itself). >13:20 C: I can't be non-binary and a vegan, like it's too many things. This is identity politics, proper, I'm sad to say. Nothing against her being non-binary. I'm against this self-cultivation through labels and lifestyles, which she basically admits and they just smile at it.
Excellent question. Yes, she does want to suggest exactly that. I am yet to be swayed this exactly isn't the case with the majority of vegans. Let us recall how we all started, Mexie admitting being moved emotionally, wanting to change the world, then she becomes the change she wants to see. I mean, if this isn't "white women college boogalloo" I don't know what is. I understand. But maybe, just maybe, consider the opposite position. What if this portrayal in the majority cases is actually true? What if one of the main mechanisms of ideology is how it obfuscates to you too what you are really doing? ……………………………………………………………hmmmmm Yes. Yes it is. >14:30 Mexie present the literary topos of the evil Westerner spreading their unhealthy fast food meat to countries where out of necessity people were vegans for generations First, as I highlight: there's a huge difference processed, junk, etc. meat and meat from your local butcher. This is just a simple fact. Second, the evil Westerners don't exclusively spread junk food. (Stop trying to idolize these cultures, putting them on a pedestal like somehow if they were more in tune with mother nature or whatever the fuck, corrupted by us.) Third, if it was out of necessity, then… giving them access to meat (not just junk meat) is… pretty… good? … I like my veggies just like the next comrade, but when it comes to vitamin supplements, special oils, tofu, soy, avocado, etc. it's pretty fucking expensive. And their nutritional value is not very good, either. By all means stuff your face with pasta and bread and rice, just don't expect to lose much weight. The farts that legumes (bean, soy, lentil, etc.) give you are actually due to a toxic irritant. You can look it up for yourself.
I'm not a vegan so I don't watch Mexie. But just reading all this, you have very mild disagreements with what she says. Personally, I don't find veganism that important. It's kind of an afterthought of socialism imo.
For most of our human history we have been hunter gatherers. This is a scientifically established fact. Also, notice the projection of our capitalist predicament ("afford meat"; expensive) onto most of human history.
Here's the redacted not very nice bit. Mexie learned anthropology, she told this herself. She knows perfectly well that we were hunter gatherers, yet she decides not to correct Contra, because she's pushing the same wagon, so there's no need. This is redacted.
Brody Martinez
no
Elijah Powell
meant for
Easton Ortiz
This is yet to be proven. We started with methane from cows, and now we're talking about meat in general. So far not once have been fish mentioned, or game, or chicken, or rabbit, or crocs, or… On the contrary. As hunter gatherers we ate much more meat. We did (and some remote tribes still do) everything to have meat on the table every day. We haven't been familiar with agriculture for a long time. We started with the "pastas and rice" around 11,500 years ago… Compared to what? Compared to the traditional Inuit cuisine (90%+ meat) I bet it's relatively low. I'm not saying that we can keep up the current levels, far from it, just please, enough with the false data and tailored narratives. This is not how the world works. not once fossil fuels were mentioned
This is pure ideology. Forcing yourself onto something you otherwise don't want, rationalizing it through morals. How about watching third world child labor? im done with them.
Eli Roberts
Stop making these threads, Aidan. You've been exposed.
Thomas Watson
What the fuck is this Aidan shit?
Justin Watson
Aidan is a mess Aidan is a waste
Luis Turner
tfw Chayagate was a falseflag bby ecelebs to scrutinize any criticism of leftists this is the real 4d chess
Lucas Wilson
Not bad. Mexie is annoying. I just want her to go away
Jose Reyes
She is a super useful asset, as other have already mentioned.
Jacob Powell
Do this experiment, show any of your normie friends, parents or relative a video of Mexie and then show them a video of Muke. See the result. Especially her latest videos about how capitalism prevents protection against natural disaster and how Cuba does it are top notch, well sourced with modern data.
If you seriously think she isn't useful to the left you are delusional. I think the whole vegan/IdPol thing can be annoying, but it's clearly not hammered down in every video, she has a separate podcast for that.
Kayden Lee
She's a dishonest liberal flirting with some hard left folk. I hate nothing more than shit like this being allowed to go on unchallenged. Look at FinBol posting a cutsy likesy message on most of her vids. It's ridiculous. FinBol must see these things pointed out.
Luke King
Nobody "in our gang" can remain uncriticized if wrong. This is not the Marxist fucking way. It is our comradely duty point out errors so that she may grow if she can. Stop thinking like liberals do, especially with your fucking ridiculous tank flag.
Angel Fisher
Fucking hell, I didn't say you can't criticize her points, especially in a Contra stream where everybody would have to cuck himself a little bit and go with the flow if you don't want to be called a problematic TERF. I'm saying the attitude some have against her is not only ridiculous but sometimes even flat-out sexist. "kill all woman tbh" or the fact that she uses make up is being used as an argument against her.
You are posting under a fucking hat a dude wore 100 years ago
Joseph Harris
Nobody ITT did this. I'd report them, btw Nobody ITT mentioned this.
You are already shielding her, dude, portraying her as a victim of things not present in this thread. I really don't care. Stop constructing protective bubbles around female comrades. It is really degrading and halts their chance of intellectual development. It would halt anyone's.
Not cool. Especially not cool if you think that proletariat feminism requires men to have a repackaged white-knight attitude.
Owen Perez
"Scientific consensus" is that livestock only contribute 15% because those scientists only include carbon dioxide and methane produced by the animals themselves and not deforestation, transport, crops grown to feed the animals, etc. that account for the other 36%. I hate both Contra and Mexie with a passion but you're clearly not educated enough to be making this "critique."
Landon Carter
Obviously you care so much that you devote an hour of your time nitpicking a two hour video. It's just ridiculous to be this much of a pedantic faggot to attack her quote-by-quote with epistemological arguments from a fucking Google hangout with a liberal. If you think she's wrong try to address the points she makes in her videos.
Secondly, there is no reason to single Mexie out like this as there are hundreds of worse e-celeb faggots arround saying stuff that's ten times worse, yet we are sitting here digging through walls of text when there is no reason to dedicate so much critical attention to her.
The rest of your post is just an attempt to psychoanalyze and gaslight me, so I'm going to ignore that.
Colton Baker
I never thought I'd see white knigthing on leftypol. This is truly troubling.
Zachary Anderson
Nice try, Aidan.
Benjamin Johnson
Go fuck yourself. Seriously, you are either a shill, this Aidan guy or a parasite. There is no reason to be this much of an asshole unless you deliberately want to stir up shit.
Brandon Perry
Are you fucking kidding me? You are getting this frustrated over totally legit criticism? Have you read the utter noob tier mistakes she makes? People would NEVER allow this kind of shit to go unnoticed with the other e-faglords.
I believe this is Mexie attempting, poorly, to express the concept of conversion ratio. The point itself isn't unfair, it is inherently inefficient to feed one foodstuff to another most of the time. The issue is the manner in which vegans constantly ignore that livestock will eat many things which humans simply can't.
Bentley Torres
The movie seems to me like a "KONY 2012 – liberals save the world!" kind of thing.
To reiterate: the main problem with "whiteknightism" is that it's essentially anti-feminists; in attitude, and in effect. Comrades (if we can call Mexie that) regardless of sex (or gender, or whatever) deserve the same treatment.
Aaron Hall
Kys you degenerate trans ancap scum
Asher Ross
Has there been a thread about a stream being picked apart like that though? I mean she has videos out there diving into the topics more precisely, why would you have to resort to a stream? A stream on which you probably would make many mistakes yourself because you don't have the time to think about your answers?
Maybe I'm just paranoid because of all this deliberate D&C going on, FinnBol, now Mexie, and now this information about this Aidan conspiracy. But this thread comes over as a bad attempt to rip an extremely useful asset out of the left. It's incredibly telling how a guy in the e-celeb thread tried to call her out for being a women and "bourgeois", and now he's making a high effort thread after that failed.
Like, out of all the fucking faggots, narcissists and mentally disturbing uglos and weirdos we have to use weaponized autism to go after a PolEcon chick who makes educational videos? If you can't see that this is an effort trying to alienate Mexie and radical leftist internet culture from each other. Same thing happened to Cockshott.
Kayden Cruz
Yeah because it's whiteknighting when the person I'm defending happens to have a pussy.
You have to try harder Aidan.
Mason Mitchell
Jesus Christ you sound like Phil Greaves.
William Perry
You aren't defending shit, tho. You "defend" anyone in a debate by arguing against the criticisms leveled against her. You are just repeating again your conspiracy theory of brocialists out to get someone who isn't even a proper leftist. And there have been 0 sexist posts ITT.
Then they are not one of us. You can't became a Marxist if your errors aren't pointed out to you. (A good chunk of Lenin's work is just that).
I have no idea what this Aidan shit is and I honestly don't care.
Aaand now you have to bring up her genitals. Great.
Nicholas Johnson
Why is that a bad thing? Phil is consistently right about many issues. Cry more liberal.
Jacob Parker
For the uninitiated;who's this Aidan chap?
Thanks in advance
Nathan Parker
Except Lenin devoted his time to criticize relevant thinkers and politicians during his time, he didn't single out one he had a particular personal quarrel with.
Stop being disingenuous. You implicitly brought up her genitals because you accused me of whiteknighting.
And do you have anything to show how that is the actual reason why the consensus is 15%? I'll remind you that all the additional things are factors in all agriculture, not just livestock, and in fact most industries contribute to emissions in a similar way, whether it is cement production for building infrastructure (a MASSIVE source of carbon dioxide), land clearance, etc. Energy is obviously not the only factor in emissions, but it is absolutely ridiculous to claim that 51% of emissions come from livestock alone, and you should definitely have more than a shitty documentary and some articles to back it up. Also, who the fuck is this Aidan guy?
Tyler Thompson
That person is literally insane, writing death threats in caps lock. Stop pretending to see her everywhere.
Kayden Russell
No she’s not. She’s an annoying intersectionalist.
Andrew Myers
I just want her to go away. Not in like a mean way. She’s just no good.
Cameron Evans
She's a liberal "anti-capitalist." I have no idea where you must stand on the left-scale to consider her a super useful asset.
Leo Thompson
She should just retire for 2 years, read, and come back. One of the most irritating things about e-celebs is that they are full of undeserved confidence. They are in for the (completely hollow) social aspects.
Badmouse retired to read, no? I can't wait to see if he improves.
All these faggots calling her a liberal with zero arguments to back it up. You know at this point it's coming from pure incel despair.
Luis Smith
Note: the cement production thing was a brain fart on my part. Cement production is a separate industry (which contributes about 5% on its own), and its emissions wouldn't be included in the statistics for industries that rely on it. On another note, percentages don't tell the whole story. If you take the regular statistic and add a whole load of externalities to a single sector that aren't then taken into account in all the other sectors, the proportions will be skewed. Furthermore, there is the issue of overlap - are those same numbers already being counted in another sector? If they are, you are basically counting the same thing twice, which again skews the statistic. Basically, there are a lot of explanations for why they got the numbers they did that are far more likely than the entire scientific field being a giant conspiracy to protect Big Meat. It could be shitty research, it could be fraud, and 51%, just high enough to allow you to say "over half", really sounds like a bogus statistic.
Chase Parker
I've stopped using it IRL since like 2yrs ago. I go as far to say that I don't consider myself part of the left. I'm a fucking communist, god damn it. That's the only term these assholes won't try to claim as their own.
Justin Bailey
Fucking this.
William Fisher
This. Have the balls to call yourself a dirty commie or gtfo.
Samuel Jackson
agreed
Dominic Thompson
I think e-celeb culture is cancer and all, but there does seem to be a concentrated effort to drive a wedge between Zig Forums and whichever friendly e-celebs it has. On another thread, someone was shitting on Bat'ko of all people.
Connor Allen
I have respect for badmouse for that.
Christopher Sanders
It makes more sense anyway because the left-right dichotomy is just a scale on bourgeois politics whereas communists want to abolish politics and democracy.
William Carter
Did mods ever check the ip of the fatimah/Chaya posts? Although, something tells me if they’re that sophisticated, she’s already using different ip
Isaac Martin
(checked) Pretty much.
Julian Torres
Doesn't she has a degree in PolEcon? I mean, if you check her videos, they are profoundly sourced. I mean, she's not talking about topics she hasn't read into, she's talking about the things she knows about. Like, I urge to watch at least one of her recent videos like this one about overpopulation in good faith: youtube.com/watch?v=OYuo2QdNu88 Where does she come off as a "liberal lifestylist", repeats liberal talking points or abandons materialism?
Christopher Ortiz
I was one of those shitting on Bat'ko and the thread was comedy gold. This is a serious thread if anybody would actually bother reading the effort posting instead of the usual "false flaggers false flagging false flaggers" leftypol game. I don't think we could call Mexie a left radical, and I have no idea why some (like FinBol who I respect most among our youtubers) keeps encouraging her shit.
Hunter Brooks
...
Connor Parker
Which of those sources Marxist or Anarcho-communist? None. SUCH SOURCES.
Samuel Wilson
This board is a fucking garbage fire. Retarded ☭TANKIE☭s, white knights, and the worst moderation I've seen in a while. What the fuck happened? It wasn't like this a couple years ago. May as well be on reddit it's gotten so bad.
Ayden Brooks
lol
all exiled Zig Forumsacks had their bans expired, been pretty bad the last few weeks
I think that if this Aidan shit is real the culprit is among those who keeps asking people about Aidan/chaya/whatever. Mods really should add a filter to "nobody".
Nathan Nguyen
Jesus, it was just yesterday when we were supporting him after he was report-bombed. Not ot mention, unlike virtually everyone here, he creates (or created, at any rate) content for Zig Forums
I'm sorry but if you fags aren't flase-flaggers yourselves, then you got swindled by them. I mean driving people away from the board for not being as leftist as you are? Even on a Chinese cartoon forum you must keep the ingroup pure?
yep. Zig Forums posters used to put a lot of effort differentiating "leftists" from "liberals," but in the end it's stupid. "leftism" is a joke, just say what your real political stance is.
Julian Bell
Who is this we? He records threads in his goofy voice, uploads it to youtube, then starts dissing leftypol among his redlib friends. Such contributor.
I've been here from day one hostile TO EVERY namefag, tripfag, picfag.
Marx, Engels, Lenin all worked on this shit their entire lives.
Pretty much. And driving away Mexie is not even my intention. She's free to (hopefully anonymously) respond to the challenge.
Thomas Taylor
Going through someone's writing word by word is a dishonest way of trying to "debunk" an argument. You remove statements from their wider point and rebuke them piece by piece rather than respond to it as a whole. It's one thing to respond to claims of fact this way (ie "she says there are x amount of chickens when actually there are y") but you aren't being thorough by dealing with statements in this way. It's like heckling an essay. It's also a fucking nightmare to read.
Andrew Parker
Trust me, listening to it was the biggest nightmare. wut
Michael Harris
Her videos are scripted. Even if her videos are consumed in video format, they are still written, and because OP is responding to the video through text and people watching this thread are reading it rather than watching it, it is writing.
Jordan Robinson
It was a back and forth talking between two people. What on Earth are you even talking about?
Dylan Morris
He's created far more OC than any of you newfags. I don't even like him, but you guys are fucking retarded faggots. I wish we could turn back the clock to when Zig Forums was good. I guess all imageboards are doomed to fail.
Kayden Williams
back to /b/ nigger
and Zig Forums was never good
Christopher White
I stopped supported him when he started to suck contra cock. Also he considers victims of communism and black book reputable sources. Also he jumped on the jason and finbol hate train. I don't give a shit about him
Logan Hill
Pretty much this. Some excellent OC over the years, very few excellent theory threads, tons of shitposting, fucking e-celebs, mostly boring/basic shit, the occasional fun cyclical.
I'm not sure if it was him but I remember an anarchist who was one of the most rabid anti-feminists (going way beyond arguing against idpol, imo) and now he turned into liberal friendliness to boost his channel. youtube.com/watch?v=5DAMdnJBNX4&feature=youtu.be&t=650
Jose Hernandez
where is baboonposter when you need him
Oliver Walker
what, really?
This too? Batko is a straight up reactionary then.
Nathaniel Fisher
Bat'ko was on the forefront of the MUH IDPOL meme which was pushed so hard to the right that it contributed to the NazBol bullshit.
I always found the term "IdPol" a bit shitty, because in 99% of the cases, it's not that someone's abandons class analysis in favor of identitarianism, it's that they didn't have a class analysis to begin with. They are just liberals. No reason to indulge in economism, it should be clear to any Marxist that the superstructure and the base are in a reciprocal and not a monistic relationship.
I mean, Marxist who were also advocates for the emancipation of marginalized groups, such as Marxists in the Civil Rights Movement, or Marxist Feminists have always been calling out phony liberal "leftism". In The Jewish Question Marx makes it clear that obviously we should be for the emancipation of minorities, but it doesn't stop there. Because Jews were emancipated, they also lost their priviliges, such as being moneylenders, because the oppression of minorities always functions as a whole system of privileges in the state which are interconnected with each other. Through emancipation, the state stops being a "theologist" and starts being a state of the public.
Blake Richardson
"Determinant in the last instance" – not a symmetric reciprocity though.
Anthony Wright
I blame Contrapoints for 90% of the shitty stuff that happened to the internet left. Not because of the transsexuality, but because literally everything she did was politicizing transsexuality to fucking hard while constantly trying to be controversial and appeal to the toxic GhamerGhazi crowd. She can't make one Tweet about SJW issues and transsexuality without making it all extremist and "problematic". She is a gigantic virtue signaling holier-than-thou machine that seems to combine all the autistic SJW power into one character she created for herself. Everything arround Contrapoints is super toxic, and she enthralls other leftist to be completely cool with every retarded take she spouts out.
Anthony Brooks
Of course not, otherwise it would be unfalsifiable.
Justin Morales
I think I have a sense of what you are saying here, care to expand it into a few sentences?
Michael Sanders
See, this conflation of criticism and anti-communism is why I say reactionarism is not exclusive to the right. This isn't /gommiepol/, stop thinking of it as your torture chamber. It's thanks to this drive towards purity that Zig Forums is taking you for a ride. It's time to step back and re-assess, man.
BBC sucks but it is heavily sourced, for whatever is worth. The book is a heavily biased, intellectually dishonest and outright lying piece of garbage, but that property doesn't necessarily apply to any given source. This is a fallacy of association.
And about jason, contra and finbol, man, you fell for e-celeb drama. I just wish he would post here without his name or trip or whatever immediately triggering a knee-jerk response. Ditto for jason, contra and finbol, for that matter. Well okay, not contra, but you get my point.
I didn't even mean videos, I mean he actually made memes and OC. That's more than probably everyone in this thread did.
Would it be too much to ask that you restrict that hostility to the ones that shitpost?
Besides the argument to be made about the long-term viability of that strategy, which the left is suffering through right now, this is an imageboard, not the damn 5th International. Put your icepick down.
Adrian Martinez
oh some YTer. I thought you mean Nicaraguan Contras. Still waiting for the link that Batko believes Robert Conquest, not that I find it unbelievable.
Liam Lewis
1. that is fucking worthless 2. I have personally created more OC, more widely-used here, than probably anyone else ITT and I hate Batko and everyone like him.
Lucas Howard
Seems pretty unrealistic that this obscure YTer could be responsible for the 2011 Tumblr/Reddit SJW boom.
