วีดีโอ

Am I a right winger or a moderate? You can’t seem to decide. People posting memes on socials about how they loved this aren’t the down trodden you are portraying them as. They are exactly the comfortable people you are lamenting against. Anyway. The point I was making is that world where everyone kills people they don’t like is bad. Not super controversial. Good luck in anarchy.

@@nickbeatoncomedy *"Am I a right winger or a moderate? You can’t seem to decide."* Another example of you just not getting it. *"People posting memes on socials about how they loved this aren’t the down trodden you are portraying them as."* Ok buddy. *They are exactly the comfortable people you are lamenting against."* I'm not lamenting against people who live comfortably. I'm calling you out of touch if you think that's the average experience. *"Anyway. The point I was making is that world where everyone kills people they don’t like is bad."* Sure. But good luck trying to argue that people who kills people for profit do not deserve the same fate they are dishing out, for profit. *"Not super controversial. Good luck in anarchy."* Im gonna go ahead and assume that another term you're throwing out that you also do not understand.

So your counter arguments are: “You’re dumb” And “Okay buddy.” Solid counter!

@@nickbeatoncomedy It is if you are selective about your reading. Not that you gave me any arguments to counter.

Didn't even debate insurance. Just said you shouldn't kill people. In fact, the opposite is true. I said the insurance system is broken. I didn't elaborate because it has been done quite often.

he didn't condemn a comic book no one has ever heard of, and that makes him wrong. got it

@@cgrondin77 I don't think that was a very charitable interpretation of the argument, but I'll definitely concede I let my emotion colour my rhetoric, so I only have myself to blame if that emotion colours how others interpret it. I wasn't asking or demanding condemnation of a comic book, I was pointing out that America's existing social norms encourage people to view using unjust violence as "morally excusable or even required." Batman is a vigilante. Vigilanteism is illegal. I've never seen anyone pause Batman to tearfully lecture the room about how individuals taking the law into their own hands is wrong. "Americans believe using illegal violence is always wrong" does not jive with "America's founding fathers were heroes for using illegal violence to drive out the British." It also does not jive with "we have more guns than people so that we can shoot our government if it ever gets uppity." Given that you've ignored the other points I made I assume you accept them so I'll let them stand. Sorry to the content creator as well, I do feel I have valid points to make but definitely concede that I could left more civil and persuasive versions of those arguments on the table in favour of... something uncomfortably reminiscent of a nastrygram. Also, if I'm not going to even listen to the author's full argument, he's certainly got no obligation to engage with mine. Sorry, if having useful political conversations on the internet was easy everyone would do it I guess :)

Honestly thank you for a thoughtful comment. We can disagree on things without it having to be dirty. There is a lot in your comments, but I think the Punisher reference was one that really stood out but your corrected. Obviously you can take in art and find something entertaining and provocative, without wanting to live in that world. Revenge stories are great fodder, but come on. I don't want to live in a world with a bunch of John Wicks running around either. Blaming anyone but the culprit is a misread of what I'm saying. The entire system is broken. There are many pieces. You can decide which is the most responsible, but healthcare for profit leaves a lot of people in the chain who are doing treatments, or not doing them, for profit. Sure the CEO is the worse offender if that's your opinion, but there are a lot steps a long the way. So anyway, good day sir ;)

@@nickbeatoncomedy Thanks, and sorry once again. FWIW someone finally made the argument I needed to hear to calm me down, and when they did I realized I actually learned it about a year ago. "The power to do what you like is the power to do what you hate." If an individual can execute another for reasons I approve of, they can also do so for reasons I disapprove of. Anyways, I had another epiphany as a result of the nastygram I left in your comments section (sorry). I had never done this before, but on this issue I went looking for perspectives that agree with me, and spent about four days marinating in them, to the point that I noticed changes in what the youtube algorithm was bringing me. I normally have much better research habits and am partly-surprised and partly-horrified that I made this mistake. Maybe explaining how I got there can help explain how society got there? Worth a shot. When I realize I've screwed up, I try to make something good come from it when I can. I am an anticapitalist and an antiauthoritarian. It felt incredibly validating to have a whole lot of people feel the same way I feel more or less all the time. I certainly don't mean to say that I live in a state of constant 'desiring reveange', more that I live in a society (Canada) that is, to me... morally unacceptable? a dystopia? a constant source of moral injury? I dunno, I don't want to sound like a drama queen, but I do not understand how other Canadians are in any way okay with Canada. To avoid a long rant I'll vastly oversimplify and say that I have always believed "billionaires have no business existing while there is hunger or homelessness," and that to me, 'freedom' means "everyone - even the people I don't like - should be able to do whatever they want as long as it doesn't harm anyone else." For once, I saw someone fight back, and not lateral violence against some random bystander or Cop, but someone who was actually directly responsible for some of the ills of society. Usually when a person snaps because of the deliberate, systemic, exploitative cruelties of society, the victim is whoever happens to be in the splash zone. For once, the victim was specifically chosen because they were directly responsible for an unguessable number of deaths and injuries and an unmournable amount of suffering. I feel about this 'victim' the way that a "normal Canadian" feels about someone who worked in Auschwitz. I'm not saying you should also feel that way, I'm saying that if you believe I do then my perspective will make a lot more sense. I believe Mr. Mangioni allegedly committed the most moral murder America will see this decade. If he had used other means to get rid of a thousand people who had all done the exact same thing this CEO did, I would rephrase it as "the most moral atrocity of the century." I'm not saying you should see it this way, just trying to explain that I do, and why. RE: using non-violent means to affect social change. "Ought implies can" - we don't tell people they should do things unless they CAN do those things. Voting won't bring about change in health care, so it makes no sense to tell people they should vote for better health care. Neither candidate was going to address the harms this CEO was directly responsible for because both of America's political parties are completely co-opted by the exact same owning class. Protest wasn't going to stop this CEO from killing people - when is the last time protest accomplished anything good? The people who own everything have gotten very, very good at suppressing, disincentivizing, delegitimizing and distracting from protest. The people who own everything also own the friggin news, but that's a whole other rant. People have tried for decades to use peaceful means to make America's health "care" system less cartoonishly evil. Luigi Mangioni became inevitable because Bernie Sanders became impossible. Anyways, I'm not throwing that rant at you to say I'm right, just so you can hopefully understand where I'm coming from. Sorry for being a jerk to you, it was about "me having gone through the same mental loop fifty thousand times and getting a little madder and a little more self-righteous each time" and even though it happened to you it had nothing at all to do with you, which is hardly fair or reasonable. I definitely understand if you don't believe me, but I've been consciously trying for two years to set a good example by treating others with respect while talking politics. Thanks for your time, all the best! Oh wait, I mean good day sir :)

Thanks for watching!

You’re

@nickbeatoncomedy not funny and a grammar nazi

Just because it works doesn’t mean it’s good/perfect

@dogedarkthethird7513 you're kidding, right? If something works extremely well, that would be the expected outcome of something if it is designed well.

@ how do you know it works "extremely well"? You don’t have any comparison so we only know that it works ok. And I mean women don’t have don’t have a urethra, so what’s with the inconsistency?

This is perfect. The generation I’m from is literally in the title you absolute fucking retard. Haha.

@nickbeatoncomedy OK boomer

Hey. Thank you!

Hahaha! Thanks for watching man!

I think we should just be friends.

@@nickbeatoncomedy and a good friend he will be 😘

Gypsy’s curse.

You look like Gary Oldman in Hannibal.