Here are some answers to questions I imagine some might have about this video. I might add more later if I need to!! *1) Is Burt Folsom really claiming that we ought to remember unregulated capitalism fondly in that video? Or is that a straw-man you’re creating to knock down?* In answering this question, I think we should consider how this video is framed and what his suggestion that we ought to rethink educational practices could possibly mean. Folsom doesn’t say that the Gilded age was exploitive for many people but that Rockefeller stands out from that system as a good dude (a fact which ought to be more recognized by the academy). Rather, Folsom transparently positions Rockefeller as a great product of the times in which he lived, a time when the goodness of one man could be vastly rewarded, allowing his goodness to be widely expressed. As such, it seems obvious to me that when he says, paraphrased, “we ought to rethink our educational practices,” he’s claiming we should stop demonizing the forces that produce men like Rockefeller. Those forces are good *because* they produce Rockefellers, Carnegies, and Vanderbilts, and academia should stop educating otherwise. This position is functionally identical to the claim, “Unregulated capitalism ought to be remembered fondly because it was a pretty good thing.” *2) Isn't that quote you used at the end there from Rockefeller Junior, not Senior?* Yes! Wikipedia gives incorrect information on this and when I looked at the source, I misread what it said. I apologize. That said, John D Rockefeller Senior was aggressively anti worker's rights. He once fired a group of laborers for trying to unionize and felt all attempts to organize were simply laziness. In the case of Ludlow, Senior actively egged on Junior to respond the way he did. And, according to Junior, while tensions were rising and people freezing in the tent colonies, he took "unusual interest and satisfaction" in the events transpiring. According to Chernow (who wrote an interesting biography I'm getting most of this information from) the Ludlow Massacre actually "forced Junior to admit that his father had some antiquated views and that he must take spiritual leave of him." It's true that I misattributed the quote to Rockefeller and not his son, but let's be clear. They were on the same side, one raising the other to do the things he did. *3) In his video on gratitude, Prager doesn’t just say gratitude will increase happiness, but also goodness. You’ve ignored this second claim. Why?* For Prager in this video, “goodness” is once again defined in terms of the attainment of other values, generosity, honesty, kindness, and every other good thing. The reason I chose not to address this claim is that it once again demands the question: If not happiness, what are these values good in reference to? Do they evidence themselves? And if so, how? I already discussed this objection extensively earlier in the video, so I decided to ignore it here. *4) You presented the canon of Western art as some homogenous cult of skepticism. I know, for a fact, that not all works of the canon present this skeptical perspective. Aren’t you cherry picking here?* I am cherry picking, you’re right! The canon is not an object that expresses one idea, it’s a collection of works that are often in stark disagreement with each other. But if we are able to frequently locate these transgressive, skeptical impulses within the works we call “classics,” then it seems strange to me that Mac Donald would think the introduction of new ideas and critical theory are in some way a betrayal of our fundamental, western ideals. These pure ideals never existed. Western history is philosophically and ideologically tense. Let’s not pretend otherwise. That said, I don’t think I’m cherry picking *that* much. More often than not, the history of the enlightenment and beyond, the *great humanist tradition* that Mac Donald embraces so vehemently, absolutely is one that often rejects power and portrays a certain skepticism. From Descartes to Cervantes to Shakespeare, from Nietzsche, who asked how we could construct morality in a godless world, to Darwin, whose work questions the teleological notion that we are here for a reason distinct from natural processes, to Freud, who questioned our control over our own minds and thoughts, the most formative works of the enlightenment and post-enlightenment canon are all deeply skeptical, particularly of various forms of authority. *5) I’ve seen many more PragerU videos than you probably have. It seems to me that what you’re describing here isn’t the unanimous position of the channel but just one trend. Doesn’t that take the steam out of your argument?* It’s hard to see why such a thing would impact my argument. My purpose here wasn’t to examine the entire body of PragerU. Rather, I’m more interested in one specific narrative that seems quite important to the channel. *6) You've torn down the work of PragerU without introducing any better ideas yourself. What do you think we should design policy around? Is there an objective good, and if so, how do you know?* First, I think it's important to recognize that not all critical things have to give a better answer. PragerU has a bunch of bad ideas and it's worthwhile to say so on the face of it. Talking about my thoughts on this issue would demand another hour and a half of your time, and I don't think it'd be worth it. Second, and I'll keep this brief, I do think there exists an objective morality, but not one that exists outside humanity. When I say "objective morality," I mean morality relative to the human condition. In my view, there are two essential things about human nature to take into consideration when deciding if an act is right or wrong. First, the desire people have to experience good things, to have the things we want and need and to follow the plans we like (consequentialism). Second, the desire people have to be seen as ends unto themselves, to not be used as pawns or instruments (deontology). I won't be substantiating these two claims here, because it would literally take the rest of my day. I highly recommend taking an ethics class yourself, though. It's good to come to your own conclusions on these things, I think. *7) Euthyphro discusses a pantheon of gods who are neither omniscience nor omnipotent. Prager is discussing the Christian God who not only controls all reality but also constitutes all reality. Considering that, assuming the Christian God, can't our moral facts be grounded in him?* Well, no. It's true that if God constitutes the entire universe, then of course, any moral law that exists is, in some sense, an invention of god. That said, if God said the sun revolved around the earth, he’d be wrong. The reason for this being that although the claim “the earth revolves around the sun” might be determined by god (he created both, after all), he doesn’t decide whether the claim is or isn't true. If he wanted to change the facts, he’d have to change the orientation of the celestial bodies. If there is an objective morality and it doesn’t function in a similar way, if it’s God’s decrees, rather than facts about his creation, that ultimately determine what is moral, then morality is arbitrary. Put another way, the question is this: How would God change moral facts if he wanted to? By decreeing a change in what is good or by changing the fundamental nature of humanity. The former falls in line with Socrates' first case, the latter falls in line with his second.
Yeah, PragerU doesn't make the best arguments and they constantly use sophistry rather than actual logically consistent arguments to support the claims they make.
There is a video that they use a brasilian guy to tell that socialims destroy Brasil (thats how we write in Brasil), but as a brasilian guy myself i can tell things are not that simple.
@@lacedemonians no, but if a large group of people give you that nickname and it is prevalent enough to be passed down in the history books, well-that's not a good look certainly. probably not a great dude
@@kyris0 - The so called "robber barons" emerged in the late 19th C when there was much potential for generating wealth and many unskilled laborers. However, as goods were mass produced and demand for skilled labor increased, then prices dropped and labor had leverage to make demands. Rockefeller, Ford, Carnegie were great philanthropists.
@Anakin Skywalker That doesn’t make any sense. Sure, those people gave a bunch of unemployed people jobs and skills in manufacturing, but they were not philanthropist. The jobs that they gave were hard, long, and payed little, and most of the time, the workers really had no choice to find a different job, they didn’t have any other skills or weren’t educated enough due to systemic problems of the time. I know for a fact that you didn’t do any research and just fell into conservative rhetoric without thinking for yourself. You literally just called an anti-semite a philanthropist.
My U.S. History teacher (who I should note is a Republican) actually used the PragerU Rockefeller video _in class_ as an example of _biased_ history. That teacher then preceded to teach us about Rockefeller's shady business practices, & the stuff ignored in that video.
I'm European and I hadn't heard of pragerU before, but it seems like a primary example of "if it's said with confidence in a serious voice over a infographic, people will believe it"
@@thatsdisco no way! that money comes without any strings attached, they're being funded by oil barons to spread lies and disinformation because they're just good at it. ;-)
@@superxxamadeus4098 It truly has become almost impossible to tell the actual right wing discourse from parodies and fiction showing why and how it's wrong. Even conservatives can't tell the difference. They are constantly misinterpreting creative works anyway.
@@groovyllicious no, they're not. Not always at least. I can think of like fifteen different journalists that are far from being maxists alone, what's your point
Well its not interesting to see the hundreds of investors in a company. By sticking to 1 person, story is more interesting, captivating and inspiring. If you want the real story, then a quick search is all you need.
Well ultimately not much can be accomplished on your own, we only say they made billions ‘on their own’ because they were the main driving force behind those billions It’s kind of like how we have superstar sports athletes, while most if not the whole team is necessary to win a game some players can take more of the credit as they were more pivotal in the game and played a greater effect
Yet many have. It doesn't mean no one else worked. But they have worked longer and before others joined them. Besides worked in a small office for 18 hours a day before he got off the ground. He had an idea and worked on it. It didn't shoot from the ground
@@edwinamendelssohn5129 Not really many. Only 2,668 on a planet of roughly 7 billion, like 3.8%. I'm sure some of them worked hard, but the more you peer into it, the more generational wealth you see at the beginning of these stories and the more graft you find interwoven into their narratives. It's a self-serving narrative the rich like to, at the very least, not dispell, as to keep the rest of us chugging along on the treadmill that powers their wealth, hoping that one day, maybe we can get there, even if it is statistically impossible.
According to Jordan Peterson, he should stop confronting political correctness and teaching people how to live in general, and focus on himself instead
No, no, he's one of the high-IQ elites that _deserve_ to decide policy, unlike those listless, stupid, underdeveloped poor and ethnic minorities. It's only the ungrateful underclass that makes up most of the population that should shut up and work harder. The smart, white, rich men at the top should keep making decisions for you the same as they always have.
The scary thing, though, is that it works. If people don't have their critical thinking glasses on, plus if they're conned by the 'U' in the name, the authoritative way the talking heads are speaking can subtly make their points sound 'obvious'.
PragerU is for the smug libertarian white dudes who talk over people in debates and went to a Christian or Catholic college to major in classical liberal arts
I’m what condescending way? I genuinely want to know. I watch PragerU occasionally and take it seriously and I’d like to talk about it. A civil conversion if you will
@@admiralofcuteness the knowledge of Tarrare eating through everything during the War of the first coalition led me to learn the french revolutionaires fought for their republic against all the europeans monarchies with no organized army and won, and that France proceeded to kick Europe's monarchist butts (but specially Britain's) 4 more times in less than 15 years. Big respect. It really changed my views. I miss our boi Sam.
J. C. Fixing society. There’s no reason to believe you’re up to the task. Just sayin. But you can eat more fresh fruits and vegetables! And get that fuckin sweet jet ski everyone else on your block has. -.-
Without unregulated capitalism and robber barons, we wouldn't have JD Rockerfeller. Without JD Rockerfeller, we wouldn't have Rockerfeller Street. Without Rockerfeller Street, we wouldn't have Rockerfeller Street [Nightcore]. Without Rockerfeller Street [Nightcore], we wouldn't have Rockerfeller Street [Nightcore] Crab Rave Remix. Without Rockerfeller Street [Nightcore] Crab Rave Remix, we wouldn't have Rockerfeller Street [Nightcore] Crab Rave Remix 10 hours. And I just don't want to live in a world without that. Checkmark Libruls 😤
Literally, lmao, he just sounds goofy as fuck, too. Idk why literally anyone takes that guys takes as worth their weight in salt... I guess because they're shared out of context on Facebook w/ inspiration porn music in the background, and if you remove enough context he sounds like he is making generic, """common sense""" statements... ya know, the kind of videos that Facebook lives off of, lol.
@Jason The people who like him don't get out of context clips of his speeches. They listen to his speeches. Those who hate him get their information from out of context soundbites, or they genuinely don't like what they hear, which is understandable in those rare cases. I notice the people who dislike Jordan Peterson also dislike whoever else they're told they're supposed to dislike. Funny how that works.
Give me a break! No, seriously, give me a break. I work for Rockefeller and I've been at this for 14 hours straight. Just 4 more to go and I can collect my quarter in pay!
There’s no reason for not being a kind, rationally thinking, hard working adult. Unless you watch Prager-U unironically. Some of their videos do make sense but a lot of them are literally just right-wing propaganda.
"Have you ever pushed a beach ball underwater? What happens? It pop right back up!" "Have you ever pushed a baby underwater? What happens? *THE BABY FUCKING DIES!*"
Mr_Sparkly_Face for example, the British empire one. You can find many examples (videos) of why this video is very bad, and another one is the Charlottesville riots video.
@@Brad-qw1te "credibility" is for those who present facts whitout justification, this man did not present fact he critically analyzed a topic showing is arguments. The "credibility"(if can even be called that) comes from either you spot flaws on his argumentation or not. The problem is: to spot flaws in a argument you have critically think(essentially to doubt everything) about it, and "thinking" is a big no no for doctrinalism.
@@slydog7131 Ironically enough, your comment proves that Rockefeller’s class was at least partially successful in creating a nation of unthinking workers. A typical stream of meaningless nonsense. The tiny minority people who have the “ability” (AKA power) to do AND think whatever they want in our society rely on the rest of us to perform and manage the productive labour without thinking too much about who controls the value that our labour imparts. This is apparent to anyone with eyes and a brain, but many (including yourself) are so captured by ideology that we would rather twist our brain in knots defending capitalism than acknowledge the material reality that surrounds us. This class blindness makes you incapable of thinking or doing anything that isn’t in accordance with the capitalist realist ideology that you subconsciously subscribe to.
Here we go again. His values aren't something he invented in his basement. He proposes Judeo-Christian values, on which America was founded. So you want to challenge them by asking "how do I know they are good", and won't be satisfied when told that God said so, go make your own country, with what you believe to be good and compare it to America 200 years later and see how worse off your people are. Have you ever picked up a philosophy book to attack anyone's values? You *know* these values work because americans are among the freest and the most prosperous people on the planet. If having a good life for everyone in a country doesn't indicate the worth of the said country's values, what does according to you?
I mean, my values came straight from some dusty book several thousand yea--I mean, straight from my imaginary frie--straight from God. They have to be right.
"Be complacent, be obedient, be grateful, know your place, don't make trouble, don't ask too many questions, accept the status-quo, listen to what we tell you." --- Every authoritarian regime ever existed left or right.
Authoritarian regimes eliminate politics so there is no longer a right or a left, one party, one figurehead. Soviets were not left, Nazis were not right, they were both authoritarian. Enemies were there at the start-the Tsars in Russia, communists for Nazis-but once eliminated leftist and rightist programs are not pursued.
Damn, you know what, maybe Dennis is onto something with the whole “the government should make policy to increase gratitude” thing because I can think of literally no better way for the government to do that than by making sure that all people perpetually have access to things like healthcare, housing, and the means to meet all other needs. I mean, I know I’d be pretty grateful if the government stopped allowing people to go into medical debt.
@@MigattenoBlakae Yee-up. America is one of the last first world countries that doesn't have some form of centralized healthcare or single-payer healthcare system for all of its citizens. European countries typically have better social safety nets too which leads to less homelessness- and less crime! "But the taxes are too high!" is usually the retort. Except by the time you add health insurance premiums, deductibles, copays, coinsurance, and drug costs to our taxes? We pay more. For worse results. A lot of Europe lives longer than us
I am convinced that people who laud Shakespeare while dismissing things like gender, race, and sexuality studies, have never actually read a single play by Shakespeare
And yet Shakespeare was able to communicate nuance and ideas in such a way where there wasn't detriment to the stories portrayed or obnoxious pandering to a particular base or group. Othello is a fantastic example of this - though it is important to know most Shakespeare plays were the saucy romcoms of their day and yet masterpieces from the father of the modern English language, not some overblown representation bollocks that is made to sell a product to (insert token group here) like you see nowadays from studios and news outlets.
@@AdHocWholius So is your position on modern mass media that there isn't anything that doesn't pander? What exactly do you mean by overblown representation bollocks? are you implying stand-in characters for the audience are bad? I don't know what your comment is saying other than Shakespeare=good, TV/movies=bad I'm only familiar with shakespeare mostly from highschool english I'd like to hear more of your thoughts on it.
@ Julian Stainton why do you anti-sjws have such a problem with seeing non-white, lgbt characters in the media? oh, that’s right, because you hate having attention diverted from your ideal of normal white straight people. minorities ARE normal, everyday people. the fact a character is black or a lesbian shouldn’t take away from your enjoyment of the story, unless you have a particular problem with these groups of people... :^/
I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again: if a person’s reasoning for not killing others is based only on the fact the Bible said not to kill I’ll be terrified of them. If the only thing stopping you from harming others is a command from an authority figure you submit to, then I question you and your morals. If I ever kill someone it will either be a necessary, unavoidable defense of self or others. I will never go out of my way to harm another person, I’m sure other people have similar position. The majority of people don’t hurt others because they are capable of empathy. They don’t need a god to tell them that murder is bad, they understand it simply by relating to the possible loss and suffering that murder causes. People don’t like pain, people feel each other’s pain, people avoid causing pain. PragerU lives in a hella creepy little world
Our Constitution was founded on God giving us rights and not the government. If government doesn't give us rights they cannot take them away. Yes people need to be told what to do. Children need to learn right from wrong. We are children of God. And yes people do still murder with the killing of innocent babies and call it 'pro choice'. Murder is still being done today in China (forced abortions, organ harvesting of falun gong, genocide and concentration camps of Uyghurs,). Prove the Resurrection was false if you don't believe in God. Many atheists, agnostics have tried but can't. Also, look up near death experiences. The US was the first to get rid of Slavery March 1807 followed by Britain. Only 2.5% of slaves went to the US the # 1 was Portugal Brazil. THe US was the first to ban Slavery. 94 nations today have not banned slavery. You can only get to God through Jesus Christ. THe world is a broken place without the people coming back to God and Jesus. Get ready for your God given rights to be taken away by the Government.
@@godisthewayandtruth7759 Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the "chosen by god" and "keep to authority" more the monarchies gig? Wasn't the US a fucking Democracy? Not by god, by the people? Also: SEPERATION. OF. CHURCH. AND. STATE.
@@godisthewayandtruth7759 wasnt the rights in the constitution based off of philosophers such as john locke? also, abortions arent done on babies, they are done on cells. they wont let you get an abortion if it's too late. people kill poor innocent animals for food and survival all the time, so why not kill unformed clumps of cells for the mothers survival and well being?
No people murder all the time that's why we have prison systems because the Federal government is punishing them. And yes Children need to be taught right from wrong. You were brought up by the Judeo Christian values of time and this country.
@@cockoffgewgle4993 Just look throughout history. This world is always far from even being good, much less perfect or ideal. Without certain people, this world would be different. Without Gandi, India would still be under British rule or at least liberated later. Without MLK, civil rights in America would at least be delayed. Peterson's argument really only works in a flawless society in which all systems work perfectly and the only limits are the morals and actions of individual people.
What I find most interesting about the Rockefeller quote is this: the thing we most remember Rockefeller for is because it's the thing that had the most historical impact on society. Him being a good father matters to *only* his family. Him being philanthropic matters to the charities he gave his money to and the people they helped. Him being a brutal capitalist that may well have been a part of a massacre, whose business practices were so unacceptable that legislation was passed specifically to deal with them? That matters to pretty much everyone in the US today. History is *supposed* to teach you the most important things. What PragerU wants to do is redefine what "most important" means. They want to drag in that unpleasant conservative clap-trap about "good people, therefore good deeds" nonsense, and then declare that this is the most important thing.
Yet for some reason History classes like to approach things from a crooked angle with an objective of skewing history to a certain political perspective. PraguerU is no different than any other history class. They indulge in semantics to lose the bigger picture and then spin it in a way that promotes their political goals. Case and point is a video talking about the Republican Party, which for some reason can’t accept the idea of a political party changing based on its affiliation with Dixiecrats. They love to focus on its ties to abolitionists and southern reform rather than looking at more contemporary history (I.E 20th century). Which just so happens to be more relevant... As far as providing an example of skewed mentality in most history classes. If you go up to the common person and ask them, “how many people died in the Holocaust?” Most people will answer with 7 million, truth be told the answer is somewhere short of 13 million. The 7 million figure is the amount of Jewish people killed during the Holocaust. What this demonstrates here is pretty obvious, there is a prioritization of which group suffered the most to the point where most people believe that only Jews suffered during the Holocaust. And as a result 6 million other persecuted victims of various groups (comprised of: polish, Ukrainian, political dissidents, and other minorities) are completely ignored. The way I see it, calling out PraguerU is the equivalent of calling out your history teacher or professor for dramatizing the point. Yes, you can stand up and condemn them, but in my own experience of calling out my history teachers on bullshit. It rarely works and only serves to make you look like a politically charged idiot. The best thing to do is to leave it and let it rot with the rest of the garbage it rolls in. At the end of the day, history is subjective and manipulating it to your own gain is something that EVERYONE does, no exceptions.
Even from a religious perspective I have ALWAYS hated the "morality comes from the Bible because God told us these rules" stance. The rules aren't just there for fun and if you have to be told murder is wrong to believe it, you're a sociopath. The reason the rules were the way they were is because they were guidelines on how to effectively love. The number one most important thing according to the Christian faith is to love, and (for the most part) the rules are a way to let you know how to do that. It's such a fundamental misunderstanding of religion to say that the rules are there, don't question just follow
I don't think the statement "Morality comes from the Bible" is bad...I guess it is a good platform for "Objective morality." if "Objective morality" ever existed that is...I don't think Murder is inherently wrong, I think if society didn't exist we wouldn't be able to say "Murder is bad." Morality wouldn't have existed if society wouldn't have existed. Of course also there lies the burden of proof as to why Christianity/Judaism/Mormonism is true so that why should the Bible be held the basis for our morals. But I am tired because I have watched a lot of debates on religion and God today so I am gonna let one that go free... Also just before anyone starts saying it, yes I feel bad for the person being murdered and I hate the murderer but that my feelings aren't a good basis for what is right or wrong. Everyone has different perspectives, what makes your perspective right? I think we can logically debunk why murder is bad.
@@LukeMcGuireoides as I heard someone say I am gonna repeat it here, when did Calvinists takeover Christianity? For this case, when and how did Fundamentalists takeover Christianity?
They took it over in the US. They mainly did it through infiltrating the Republican party. The christian right here overshadows non fundy christian to such an extent as to nearly blotting them out. It's a sin. It's a m effing shame
it also doesn't help prove their argument when you stop and reflect on the fact that just about every major religious figure (jesus christ, moses, prophet muhammad peace be upon him) were literally rebelling against rigid authority. jesus against the romans, moses against the pharaoh's regime, muhammad (pbuh) against the pagan worshippers and rulers of then saudi arabia who wanted him dead. like, religion is literally all about faith in god above tyrannical government
This video snapped me out of a spiral two years ago when prageru indoctrinated me with propaganda and I felt so embarrassed after I realized what had happened to me and how much I lost myself in the process.
That's amazing! Most people would double down! You did not. But yes. Prager U is just another sick way for the rich to brainwash the poor. It makes me angry.
When i was 12/13 prageru would give me ads and since i hadn’t developed much skepticism and it had U in the title i thought it was an online college so i just took everything they said as fact. Thankfully i am away from all of that now and this video is a part of many videos(that i have watched) showing the amount of propaganda prageru used and how their claims fall a part with just a little bit of thought
I once got a PragerU ad that said that I was oppressing some dude by saying "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas". Like, bruh. I don't know what holiday you celebrate, regardless that a good majority celebrates Christmas. Even then, holidays can be plural, encompassing Christmas and New Years.
Right? I don’t get how so many people in the US are so upset about “Happy holidays”. Most people here in Germany say it, because it encompasses New Years as well.
Mina The Raichu saying happy holidays makes yOu A DiSgRAcE and you are RUiNiNG aMeRiCaN cULtURe I remember getting that advertisement too and couldn’t believe how stupid it was.
Churches in general are greedy. My former church wanted me to pay tithing every year. Becoming an atheist means I don't have to give my hard earned money to a greedy clergy. Religion is a trillion dollar industry. It's a business and churches should be taxed like every other business. George Carlin was right!
@@GenerationX1984 If you need George Carlin (RIP), to tell you that, then, i and many other Motorists thank you, for keeping your Eyes, on the Road, as there are many "Give our God Business some damn money or go to Hell. Have a nice Day."--Billboards, a lot. "Teyethesores."
As a practicing catholic i have become frustrated with how people use their religion. They use it as a source of power divide people and so on. Both sides of my family are strong catholics my mom dad and grandma taught me that being kind and helpful to everyone is what jesus would want. Being mean and rasist is satan's work.
Yeah, honestly, he’s a professor! His job is to address confusion and turn it into knowledge. This philosophy encourages students to just bluntly regurgitate old information without truly learning
Crowe3717 when is questioning inopportune? What if I question at the right opportunity? Then will it confuse me? Even if it does, so what? What is confusion? Is it harmful? If so, can it be demonstrated? Is a kid in class who’s engaged yet confused impossible of attaining further enlightenment? What is enlightenment? Are these questions Socrates would ask? Who is Socrates? Am I Socrates?
Yeah and also a "philosopher" somehow because you know that is exactly the only area of knowledge that doesnt go around questioning the act of questioning itself just for the sake of questioning
I honestly find the gratitude thing hilarious. Like, I'm pretty sure loads of people would be grateful for policies that forgive student debt and grant access to free health care and housing, Dennis. What's that? That's not what you mean? Oh, okay.
Not to mention it totally runs counter to the “always strive to do better” and the “work harder and smarter” capitalist rhetoric they are shoving. If I’m suppose to be grateful for what I have then what reason do I have to “work harder and smarter and stop being so gosh darn lazy all the time” then if I’m not allowed to want more then what I have? There is no reason to give blood to the market gods then if I can’t expect to work hard to get more. It’s classic doublethink.
Okay, but I have a question where does that money go and come from? It has to come from somewhere. The government? The government is built on us so that money comes from us.
@@trevorlee7953 see this is that good faith thing Joel was talking about. You know very well that it’s complicated and explaining it here is just stupid! A waste of time…especially when you have google right there, right? I bet there’s someone smarter than me, that knows exactly what they’re talking about, and they’re written a concise plan to explain the question you just asked. I’ll make it as simple as I can for you tho, ok? Medical care is a scam, insurance is a scam, lots of people get Medicaid or other “free” healthcare. So when my kid slams a finger in the door, my garbage ER will rake in money and provide almost nothing, then I follow up and the specialist cuz the ER is a joke. They give us some X-rays a $10 aluminum brace and ice pack and some advice, I give them a thank you and leave… and you pay the $75k. That’s all just the private medical racquet tho. Most folks don’t have a doctor. Period. They get 0 care until they go to the ER, which costs tens of thousands each time, when regular medical could keep a person more healthy, thus preventing emergency care. The real problem is the profits over people model, when we punish others in the way we’re doing, it makes our communities weaker. You can do as much work as you want but when you rest of the neighborhood goes to shit then you go right along with it
@Lex Bright Raven, you’re not wrong on the highest bidder. The government and politicians are heavily based on money. I feel politicians are bound to mess up because they are usually rich and out of touch with the people.
The way I see his value system of gratitude is creating a subservient lower class who is brainwashed into being grateful even when they’re being screwed over
Waste not want not. Be grateful for what you have so that you appreciate it more deeply. Be grateful you're not worse so that you can find relief. Be grateful of your opportunities so that you have the chance to act and *then* act to improve your life. To remain idle in the face of challenge is foolish but to remain bitter in the face of prosperity is perhaps more foolish. This is the central idea. I, for instance, have applied this to water. I live where the water is very clean and adopting this mentality of gratitude has made it more pleasant, almost delicious, to drink it. Now I ask you, when's the last time you've had a drink of water?
@@fiddleriddlediddlediddle Humans have to drink water everyday or they'll die. What do you mean by:''when's the last time you've had a drink of water''?
Adultism on a societal level: How dare you not be grateful and simply settle for what you have under my roof! I feed you and clothe you and pay for you - yes I also decide for your existence but that doesn't mean you don't have all responsibility for being alive and being born and being happy and owe me everything. Now do my work for me and be ashamed for wanting to be treated like a human being and to not feel shitty you ungrateful slug.
Tune in next time when we discuss PragerU's video "Adolf Hitler: Was he really as bad as history says he is?" and its correspondence to defending Trump.
@@Goldenboy-pe2ci Hitler wasn't religious really but sure they are gonna cherry pick quotes from him just like they did with the American founding fathers to "prove" America was a Christian nation....
There's one small, inconsequential line from this that really get stuck in my head. "It is the loving duty we *owe* those writers, artists, and thinkers who works made our world possible." I know it's got nothing to do with the point Big Joel is making, but this sticks with me because it's describing something fundamental about conservatism that I've seen crop up over and over, most notably in conversations about the removal of statues. Conservatives believe, or at least act as if they believe, that "great" people are owed certain treatment from society. Shakespeare *deserves* to be taught to students, not because there are valuable lessons contained within his works but because he was important and has earned the right to be memorialized. To ignore Shakespeare is to disrespect him, not give him the adulation that is his due. Confederate generals earned their statues by being important men and it is unfair of us to take that which they earned away from them. It even applies to conversations about people like the founding fathers; it's why they claim it is unfair to judge historical figures by today's standards when it comes to monuments and statues. To the conservative mind those statues don't exist for us, they exist for the people they depict. That is George Washington's statue, and we cannot take it away from him because we have decided that things which were commonplace during his time are wrong today. I'm not going anywhere with this, just wanted to get it out of my head.
You reminded me of an amazing line from a conservative broadcaster covering a story about if a memorial parade should be explicitly religious or not And one talking head said "If these atheists don't believe in the afterlife...who are they even parading for?" as if the idea was that we hold memorial events for the ghosts of people in heaven to watch. Wish I could find it because it was truly jaw-dropping
Great Man History is the belief that history is the story of those born as "Great Men." Common examples of people considered "Great Men" today are Shakespeare and Tolstoy. However, Tolstoy himself was one of the greatest opponents of Great Man History, stating in War and Peace that: "He [Napoleon] is no Great Man. None of us are Great Men."
I came here after getting their ad. It wasn’t the first time but being a minority who has an actual brain I was actually pissed off that something like this establishment exists. I watched an ad about how females are scoring better at males in school. Which is like ok maybe we can improve the schooling system. But then they go on to say how it’s biased to female preferences and how females are into fiction, poetry and reading complicated texts which is already a very outdated statistic. They go on to say how we should improve the school system by going back to the original way of schooling back during the industrial revolution which is the dummest thing ive ever heard. they go on to say they should let boys go back to the 1900s and the caotic behavior is just them doing their boy things and we shouldn’t stop it. But it’s ridiculous cause they’re basically promoting maintaining a patriotical society women and girls especially have been raped and abused for years by these boys who were let to do their own thing and now they are trying to convince teachers to just let it happen and not scold them when they act out of line because it’s “natural”. They topped it off with homophobia in the end of the ad and I was done with them
God damn...why did I get fooled by them at one point? I think I saw one of their less horrible videos and thought "eh, sounds cool bro", welp, time to unsubscribe from THAT trainwreck.
Prager: "Good values are what you need most ". Us: "Which values are the good ones?". Prager: "Mine, of course". Us: "And which are yours?". Prager: "The ones in the Bible, basically". Us: "Are you sure you want to call it a 'university', Dennis?"
I love the chapter in The Bible that goes "The wealthy American man knows what's up, forget Jesus and his teachings and example. Loving thy neighbor is for the week leftists!"
@@zayatamburelli5322 The study of religion is a field of study you know? Where I live RE (ReligION education) is basically information about the main religion, that obviously effects the local culture so much it would be silly not to explain it in school, and most other religions are presented as well so as to understand domestic minority cultures and to prepare us to eventually interact with foreign countries and people from other cultures. It's also fundamental to be informed about religion, sociology of religion, psychology of belief and ideology, and the origins of sacred texts and practices. You can't really be expected to have a fair discussion on or even critique your backround religion nor any other if you can't understand where things come from. History isn't enough because it's good to know why people think like they do, why such tiny things become detrimental for the unity of a religious group and splits it in multiple traditions. Dogmatics too can be taught neutrally. Only when it becomes a sermon is there something wrong with it. Frankly, that does happen in less populated areas and our local "Bible belt" zone. In general though, quite contradictorily those students who are members of the main church here tend to get far wider education on the diversity of religion both locally and internationally, since the different RE subjects are separated based on religion membership, and those outside religion have their own subject, but it isn't as well developed as the main RE classes. Because the other school subjects have far less pupils less resources can be directed to them as well. Philosophy and ethics are fused into RE classes in primary school. Even though education like this has long roots in my culture, it's not quite there yet. I personally support a common Religion Information subject in schools, which would make it even more neutral and fair. Religion education (in contrast to "religious education") should give tools for individual thinking and for understanding ourselves and others. We lose something fundamental if we see the teaching OF religion automatically as religious conduct.
Educating about religion isn't necessarily wrong (think of it as a philosophy/history class), but if the point of the religious education that you're getting is indoctrination, then yes, that doesn't belong in a university setting.
My Lutheran school “Christian Life Impact” teacher decided to show us PragerU’s video “If there is no God, then murder is okay” to discuss why God is the reason behind all human morality. Hearing the “fact-based” evidence (if you can even call it that) presented, left me absolutely pissed and over all thinking “What the fuck?”. I was so confused that such a video was being presented as a reputable source, although no reputable sources were never mentioned, nor viable “evidence” provided for the claims made. It was terrifying to hear what basically sounded like “The only thing keeping me from committing murder is the bible.” Any human with basic empathetic feelings would know that a book, regarded as Holy or not, shouldn’t be the only thing holding you back, your regard for human life, and the intense emotions that come with it, should be.
Notice how they claim the richest man ever was J.D.Rockefeller, a white christian, rather than Mansa Musa (widely accepted as the actual holder of that title), a black muslim
@@samsoncologne9332 I know that's not the point of the video, I'm making a point of the biased perspective PragerU uses to skew its followers view of the world
@@supercriceto No. If they wanted to do that then they wouldn’t publish such classic videos like “why the left ruins everything”. There is no room for interpretation there. Nothing to get you thinking. Just spoon-fed propaganda funded by fracking billionaires.
In their defense he didn’t actually care about the money. It was just how he kept score, so that he knew he was winning the game. And he would do anything to win.
That IS capitalism. All the feelings nonsense from conservatives is just that. But it's important that YOU judge your value by your productivity, it makes it easier for them to be billionaires.
It's so funny that prageru never talked about Teddy Roosevelt, even when he's basically the embodiment of the supposed values of a supposed patriotic libertarian. But he was crashing monopolies, and obviously the billionares who """support""" prageru don't want that to happen again
@@giovanni4470 he wasn't, I said he embodies the supposed values of a patriotic libertarian. Patriotism = his valiant fight for his country in Cuba during the Spanish-American war, and all around willingness to serve his country. Libertarianism = he busted monopolies, thus making way for the (actual) free market to do its thing. Of course libertarians nowadays don't have problems with monopolies, a lot of them are even financed by one. Regardless, a genuine free market requires frequent trust busting.
+ Brigid Madden But Mansa Musa wasn’t white or Western, and we can’t have a non-Western non-capitalist black guy being the richest ever, that wouldn’t prove our point.
Yes, according to press at the time. Happened at Ludlow, Colorado, where the National Guard used machine guns to fire into the miners' colony, killing around two dozen people, including women and children. The aftermath led to an armed attack by the miners upon dozens of anti-union establishments and against the Colorado National Guard. See the Wikipedia article and this from "Westword": features.westword.com/ludlow-massacre-anniversary/
Totally works both ways tho, saying you dont like the system and offering something that was proved not to work or nothing at all is also stupid as hell
Rodrigo Garcia I have to disagree, voicing to your representatives that you don't like something is an effective motivator of change. It can make change for the better easier as well, since there aren't multiple conflicting strategies floating around, but common support around handling a problem. Example, I don't like litter in my city, I tell my elected officials, and it's their job to figure out how to fix that problem. More trash cans? More city workers picking up trash? Fines for littering? I don't actually care what solution they pick, I just want the litter gone.
that's exactly the point I was getting at. Once you decide that the system has to change, there are endless possibilities for solutions and thus endless discussion and debate on how to implement the change. When you just want everything to stay the same, there is no debate. Just like PragerU views morality: it is what it is. There's no need to argue your way is best, you just have to convince everyone that it's not worth it to try something else. The path of least resistance.
Also, addendum to my first comment: it’s not that PragerU and Jordan Peterson don’t have an opinion about the systems we live in. They do: they think they’re good. But they never want to analyze why they are “good”, either because they’re genuinely ignorant to the fact that they benefit from these systems more than others and thus can’t understand other people’s criticisms. Or they KNOW that the current system treats them better than other people and they’d like to keep it that way, but because of their moral posturing they don’t want to admit that they know what they’re doing hurts others. Lol sorry I’ll shut up now.
It amazes me just how much PragerU manages to unite people. The left, the right, religious people, non religious people. Americans and non Americans, humans and aliens, cats and dogs. All united in their distaste for PragerU. Truly inspiring.
Most of these videos fail to mention is that morality isn't all black and white. There is a grey area. A good example is stealing food for your family. It is wrong to steal, yes, but is it wrong to steal food in order to feed your family?
@SomethingScanning How is the “steal to feed your family or face death by starvation” thought experiment a false dichotomy? It is entirely possible to find yourself in such a situation.
@SomethingScanning False dichotomy? Apparently you never lived through it. Granted, neither have I, but I can imagine it happening to many people, especially of developing countries.
@SomethingScanning Well, by that logic, you're also not in a position to assume the individual has more options because you likewise don't know the context of the situation. On a semi-related note, arguments like yours have historically been used to delay decisions by drawing the conclusion that it is impossible to know for sure how to respond to a situation due to additional concurrent factors that complicate the scenario, often providing scant or misleading statistical evidence to suggest such factors are at play. This is an interesting argument because it appeals to one's sense of skepticism while also pretending to maintain a neutral stance.
@@dominusempyreus2383 There are fallacies from both points BUT the false dichotomy is beyond true. There are countless other ways to get food without stealing. Now you may find yourself in a situation where its steal or starve. But even then understanding right or wrong would lead a righteous person towards holding a sign to get money or food/ asking to do work for food/ asking for food/ NOT EATING (when i was homeless sleeping through it until the kitchen opened in the morning was always an option in my mind. The only point I'm making is that "stealing or starving" is a false dichotomy. Its never that simple.
there's this polish book called 'ferdydurke' by witold gombrowicz and the most famous scene is (paraphrased and simplified)): "repreat after me kids - słowacki [a polish poet] was a great poet!" "but why was he a great poet? i don't feel that he was a great poet" "because.. he was a great poet" "but why?" "because he was a great poet" "but what makes him a great poet" "stop questioning me on this! think of my kids! why are you harming the kids?" think it might be a bit topical here
I think the point of PragerU is best summed up by this: “The modern conservative is engaged in one of man’s oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. -John Kenneth Galbraith
For the life of me I cannot understand people who are so against stereotyping that it becomes their identity, only to turn around and unironically broadbrush a gigantic segment of the population.
As a former conservative Christian, I can tell you that the language of those videos fit very neatly into the Doctrine of those churches. It is imperative to them that God be the foundation of Values, because if there is Values without God then God cannot exist. God is the source of Good, and if values are subjective, then values can be whatever we want them to be. Value must be an unchanging rock centered on Goodness and what is the ultimate source of that goodness? God. They preach that there is no guarantee humans can come up with good values without divine intervention. I'm not bringing this up to try to refute you, I'm just offering a window into how THEY think, because I used to think this way.
oh my god my dsylexic ADHD brain reading through this did not like it at all lol glad you got out of that type of thinking, it's confusing and flawed asf
It's kinda almost the exact same thing they do when they're falsely generalizing & stereotyping atheists within their Christian Propaganda. (i.e. "Atheists just *want* to sin!" & "Atheists are just mad/angry, or upset, at 'God'.") All because they *Cannot* accept the reality that people actually exist who Genuinely Don't Believe in a "God". Because if they accepted that then it would allow some minor doubts to creep in any time they even tried to understand an Atheist.
That was confusing as hell 😂 and I guess it makes total sense... If your values are coming from God himself. But I personally have only heard other humans telling me that God says this or that. Flawed, imperfect, mortal humans. I'm not just gonna take their word for it.
PragerU: Stop caring about things. Don't try to make the world better. Accept your lot in life. Shut up and blindly follow what authority figures tell you.
@@matan7899 How does one, "make their life perfect?" Surely the quality of my own life in a large part depends on the quality of the world around me. And therefore, fixing the world around me, or "fixing others," would be the same thing.
I hate the glorifying of the good ultra-wealthy people in capitalism that people do with Rockafeller and Bill gates. It's like hundreds of years ago people were probably glorifying good monarchs like "king so and so was such a good king, he gave money to the peasants and raised his children well so, therefore, the whole system of monarchy must be good because look at this one really good guy"
@@fluffynator6222 The outsourced salaries for the people they pay (or don't pay at all sometimes!) to actually make the phones, laptops, and other devices aren't decent, from what I've heard
I live in southern colorado and my great great grandfather was a coal miner and as soon as Folsom started talking about how good Rockafeler was, I just thought to myself "wasn't he responsible for the Ludlow massacre?" So I am really glad you brought that up at the end as I don't think a lot of people know what happened.
@@ahmadsuleman9045 Rockefeller made money from more then just oil. He owned stock, land, housing, coal mines, oil, and some other stuff (not sure on all of those might be some I missed and other that I have wrong). While he is commonly known for oil that was not his only source of income.
I love the "don't try to fix the world" line, these people would have said the same thing to Jesus Christ. He did not have any qualifications or degrees, they would have told him to not complain and better himself. Amazing.
Can't get over the irony of using an activist throwing a rock through someone's window as an example of "not blaming others for your problems". Because, see, the person who seems most likely to "blame someone else for their problems" in that scenario is... the homeowner. Quite understandably so; he has a broken window because someone threw a rock through it. So how should he respond: Beat up the activist? Call the cops to do it? Demand compensation? Try to understand their motivation? Try to persuade them it was wrong? Join the protest? Call a politician to have the protest suppressed? No, suggests Jordan Peterson, he should fix his own window and then work on the anger stirred up inside him by the incident. Now, arguably that's not a *bad* response - it would presumably be Jesus' response - but I'm faaar from convinced that it would genuinely be Jordan Peterson's response.
Ehh, don’t know if that’s the best example. In that case you’ve been directly targeted and wronged and know who did it. The Prager base is generally mad at social constructs they think directly target them but don’t.
I love how the message I'm getting so far is "young people are ungrateful narcissists because they aren't grateful to us but that doesn't make us narcissists", while also saying "focus on yourself, not the world or your nonsense sjw politics", "wage imbalance isn't an issue because rich people are good people who deserve that much money", "all that matters are values/script/classics, so long as my religion/culture can take credit for it, and no, you can't question it or put critical thought into it whatsoever", "for all you people who have the 'right' values, go vote", "values are more important than money and happiness, so having good values will bring you money and happiness, boom, checkmate anticaps and evil ungrateful poor people"
@@cockoffgewgle4993 spreading rightist extremist propaganda. holding speeches, giving interviews, spreading hate through very clear lies (like everything he said about bill c16, which is in no way what he claimed it is).
@@jurgnobs1308 Ah, so a bunch of abstract buzzwords. Gotcha. Bill C16 compelled him to say things he didn't want to. Remember when lefties believed in free speech?
Rockefeller was a social Darwinist, and the richest man to ever live was a West African king, Mansa Musa (but of course PragerU would never tell you that)
Actually that's literally impossible to say. First of all, that's 700 years ago. Secondly are we talking with inflation included, or just 1 to 1. Because I am pretty sure in a 1 to 1he's not. And even if it was inflated, I somehow doubt that. It'd be impossible to actually calculate inflations between the 1300s to 2019, income for his entire life based on that, and a bunch of other things. So even if it something you claimed, proving it would be nearly impossible. And because of that, he really can't be declared "richest man" because you can't accurate prove he is. And we CAN prove the wealth of people like Rockerfeller, Bill gates, and so on.
My 7th grade social studies teacher basically worshipped the pragerU videos. We probably spent more time watching those videos than actually learning actual history.
You are a thinker and a person who is profoundly and deeply informed; a critical thinker with the ability to ignore the weeds and focus on the trees towering over us. I intuitively felt that PragerU was just a mouthpiece for pure arch-conservatism. But you have been able to extract a higher order intent in all of their philosophical swill. I like that. Keep on thinking, kiddo. You are doing good things.
Boomers are millions of people. Nice and not nice. Many helped end the war in Viet Nam and introduced movements against racism, against poverty, went to jail for human right etc. Some were Black Panthers and fought for women's rights. I think people are mean the rulers the 1% that are so despotic and cruel.
i had a teacher in high school who showed us a few of these videos in class. we just laughed and made fun of what they were saying the whole time and he looked so annoyed lmao
Jesus man what a shitty educational system, these videos are the opposite of education, we actively laugh at this garbage in academia. Glad you guys see through this bullshit
They make it pretty clear at the bottom of every page on their website. PRAGER UNIVERSITY IS NOT AN ACCREDITED ACADEMIC INSTITUTION AND DOES NOT OFFER CERTIFICATIONS OR DIPLOMAS. BUT IT IS A PLACE WHERE YOU ARE FREE TO LEARN.
Yeah, they do that because it's illegal to call yourself a university if you aren't. So they changed their name and put a notice at the bottom of their page where nobody will see it while tons of casual fans think they're a real academic institution.
But fun fact: no In fact the king of Mali, Mansa Musa, was the richest man in history. This is in part due to the unique mineral deposits in the deserts of mali and the unique trade community created by the spread of Islam.
@@rickrolld1367 That isn't particularly unexpected of royalty doing a pilgrimage in the history of the Muslim world. What *is*, however, impressive, is how his charitable donations during his pilgrimage were enough to severely destabilize and inflate the economies of the places he went through. My dude broke Egypt's economy because of how much gold he gave away to random people there lmao
“Will this policy increase or decrease gratitude among people?” To the republicans, banning things that don’t effect anyone but the people you’ve banned drastically reduces gratitude among people and doesn’t increase it at all.
@@Emppu_T. never get a degree for any reason other than money basically. Philosophy is the stupid parsons degree, we can build society without thinking about it. We can understand complex topics like gender with common sense like people did in the past. I mean it's common sense that there is only one sex and gender men and women are just lesser men and not their own category. They are only vessals for babies to grow in and provide little to nothing to the child's nature. Seriously this used to be how sex and gender was seen before it was actually studied. I suggest we actually study topics instead of dismissing them because they don't make money or because we think nothing new is worth while without having an even basic knowage of what the topic is. Considered how big a role sex and gender play in society (especially for conservitives) I suggest we actually look at at the history of it to get a better understanding of past ideas as well examine current ideas. We do this wity economic models and other ideas so why is doing it for gender ridiculous? Oh wait you don't care. You don't know and you don't care to know.
I can imagine Prager U's response to the First They Came poem. "You didn't speak up when they came for the socialists? Good! Self improvement should be paramount. You can't change society anyway. Oh you said nothing when they came for the Jews and unions too? You're on the right track to true happiness!"
+Macaroni&Cliche -- I think you're making a joke sort of nonsensical reference. But I'm going through my _Stalin History_ lists of: *5-yr Plans,* *Destruction of the Kolkhoz,* and *10-million Starved&Murdered Ukrainians* I don't see where the privatization reference....Oh, wait. I see it now! Contrasting whatever evils of privatization against the evils of centralized State Planning! I see it now. Still not funny, but I can see the point now
I can’t believe i used to unironically watch these people. That’s a phase i’m so glad i moved passed. Now the only thing i watch involving them is videos like this and YTPs
It's only gender politics when women fight back, not when women are pushed down, that's normal. It's only class warfare when the poor fight back, not when the poor are pushed down, that's normal. And so on. It's essentially the foundation of conservative messages to people. "Don't fight back."
Richard Roberson No that's just a smoke screen for the real message of "Sit down, stop thinking, and shut up." There's absolutely NO reason to think you can't self improve while also working to make the world a better place. But that is an argument they try very hard to make. They're trying to use self improvement to rebrand, justify, and sell apathy.
@@magicsteve5523 The Romans always held "lesser cultures" in contempt because of practices like ritual sacrifice. Ironically, it was one of the highest honors for a general to bring back prisoners of war and have them ritually killed to show Roman supremacy. It's not a new thing, it's easier to fashion yourself as a liberator or as fighting in self-defense (the Republican Romans, again, always justified their wars by claiming self-defense) than as conquerors, holding the moral high ground as a way to pretend that one's own culture/goals are holier than thou.
@@duncanjackson6157 A lot of people are still trying to work out what happened in the last election. I'm attributing it to the Conservative party leadership's political abilities rather than their policies - they ran an effective, if underhanded, campaign based on exploiting public fatigue with the whole brexit mess, and they combined that with a strategy of dividing their opponents: By convincing the Brexit party to stand down in key constituencies, they were able to get close to 100% of the pro-brexit voters to vote Conservative, while the anti-Brexit voters were split between Labor, Lib-Dem, the SNP in Scotland, and a few lesser parties like the Greens - all of which ran on a 'brexit-lite' platform of negotiating a new but close trade partnership. They split the vote, and it worked.
1. Tell me where I can access this “Roblox university” lmao 2. Not only adults, supposedly QUALIFIED adults. Or maybe just old guys in suits? Kinda hard to tell the difference nowadays
@@chimp4225 Old people in suits, the highest authority. No, you don’t need to know what their history with academics, politics, and our funders are, let alone why they might be biased or entirely citing their own sources. Noooo, they’re tooootally valid educators. Pay no attention to the Kochs behind the curtain.
Silly Dennis. What matters most in life isn’t morals. It’s to crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of their women!
Just watching you talk on the couch was a surprisingly amazing experience. You have a natural charm that comes out only when we're watching (and not just hearing) you for an extended amount of time. Great video; you're so insanely underrated and underwatched.
Oh dang, I recently read Ron Chernow's biography of Rockefeller. The people who hold him up today as an exemplar of free-market capitalism should read it, too. Then they'd know that he said things like this: “What a blessing it was that the idea of cooperation, with railroads, with telegraph lines, with steel companies, with oil companies, came in and prevailed, to take the place of this chaotic condition in which the virtuous academic Know-Nothings about business were doing what they construed to be God’s service in eating each other up.” He wasn't just a monopolist out of self-interest; he thought monopolies were /good/. Far from valuing the competition of unregulated markets, he abhorred their chaos. The instability of the early dog-eat-dog days of the oil industry drove him to swallow up as much of it as he could so that he could calm it all down and make it predictable. For what it's worth, it's true that Rockefeller had plenty of virtues. He was a man of good character in his personal life. He was very charitable, and not just for the sake of his image. He gave frequently, often in private, and before he was rich. And while he never hesitated to move against his enemies, he was never vindictive or sadistic. That said, he was self-righteous, ruthless, extremely anti-union, and completely incapable of self-criticism. And for all his talk about the wonders and public goodness of "cooperation", his anti-competitive dealings were always carried out with extreme secrecy.
Early chaos of oil was because it was so unregulated! The moment somebody tapped a new field, you created a Tragedy of the Commons, where everybody around that land knew that if they didn't drill as much as possible as fast as possible, then their neighbors would take all the oil. The unregulated drilling created massive regional surpluses where oil men became impverished because of how worthless the oil had become when they got it to market, then periods of oil drought where there was no oil to be found until the next field was discovered.
They way I see it (and I could be wrong), is that his ideas of monopoly, are not from malice towards the market for profit, but his views that competition becomes unnecessary cutthroat and anti-consumer, and that a monopoly (probably with the assumption it happens by good people) could work in unison to benefit the consumer, and deal with the problems of the industry. Part of It was his idea of regulation, as a regulation _by_ the market. I think.
@SomethingScanning That's kinda of what I was saying. I wouldn't doubt that he saw himself as a "benevolent dictator" of the market, even if he did want to help people.
Slave: I'm angry that master beat my wife and children to death! Jordan Petersen: Quit complaining about others, focus on being a better slave for master, and you will find true happiness!
omg THAT is literally the point of virtuous behavior. when you find yourself fucked in life that is truly all you have. holy fuck by this state of mind youll likely live and die without fulfillment as if any other aspect of life aside from a set of core values will help you in the long term. the irony of your thinking is honestly kinda sad
So before I watched this video, I really thought Rockefeller was this pinical of morality and kindness, whenever my dad talks about him, he says he was the greatest man of the time. Well shit, I wonder what else I've been led to believe was great when it really wasn't.
A good channel I can recommend on topics like that is Shaun, my favorite of his is his British Rail video and his newer videos about the nukes and IQ are great as well, but very long.
Most of his videos sound like something from the Colbert Report, but serious. I wonder how much of this he actually believes, and how much he just says because he’s paid to.
"No country in history has fought for the liberty of others as much as North Korea. Until Americans who celebrate Christmas acknowledge the evils I committed in MY youth, we will continue to live in a society." - Dennis Prager
Here are some answers to questions I imagine some might have about this video. I might add more later if I need to!!
*1) Is Burt Folsom really claiming that we ought to remember unregulated capitalism fondly in that video? Or is that a straw-man you’re creating to knock down?*
In answering this question, I think we should consider how this video is framed and what his suggestion that we ought to rethink educational practices could possibly mean. Folsom doesn’t say that the Gilded age was exploitive for many people but that Rockefeller stands out from that system as a good dude (a fact which ought to be more recognized by the academy). Rather, Folsom transparently positions Rockefeller as a great product of the times in which he lived, a time when the goodness of one man could be vastly rewarded, allowing his goodness to be widely expressed. As such, it seems obvious to me that when he says, paraphrased, “we ought to rethink our educational practices,” he’s claiming we should stop demonizing the forces that produce men like Rockefeller. Those forces are good *because* they produce Rockefellers, Carnegies, and Vanderbilts, and academia should stop educating otherwise. This position is functionally identical to the claim, “Unregulated capitalism ought to be remembered fondly because it was a pretty good thing.”
*2) Isn't that quote you used at the end there from Rockefeller Junior, not Senior?*
Yes! Wikipedia gives incorrect information on this and when I looked at the source, I misread what it said. I apologize. That said, John D Rockefeller Senior was aggressively anti worker's rights. He once fired a group of laborers for trying to unionize and felt all attempts to organize were simply laziness. In the case of Ludlow, Senior actively egged on Junior to respond the way he did. And, according to Junior, while tensions were rising and people freezing in the tent colonies, he took "unusual interest and satisfaction" in the events transpiring. According to Chernow (who wrote an interesting biography I'm getting most of this information from) the Ludlow Massacre actually "forced Junior to admit that his father had some antiquated views and that he must take spiritual leave of him."
It's true that I misattributed the quote to Rockefeller and not his son, but let's be clear. They were on the same side, one raising the other to do the things he did.
*3) In his video on gratitude, Prager doesn’t just say gratitude will increase happiness, but also goodness. You’ve ignored this second claim. Why?*
For Prager in this video, “goodness” is once again defined in terms of the attainment of other values, generosity, honesty, kindness, and every other good thing. The reason I chose not to address this claim is that it once again demands the question: If not happiness, what are these values good in reference to? Do they evidence themselves? And if so, how? I already discussed this objection extensively earlier in the video, so I decided to ignore it here.
*4) You presented the canon of Western art as some homogenous cult of skepticism. I know, for a fact, that not all works of the canon present this skeptical perspective. Aren’t you cherry picking here?*
I am cherry picking, you’re right! The canon is not an object that expresses one idea, it’s a collection of works that are often in stark disagreement with each other. But if we are able to frequently locate these transgressive, skeptical impulses within the works we call “classics,” then it seems strange to me that Mac Donald would think the introduction of new ideas and critical theory are in some way a betrayal of our fundamental, western ideals. These pure ideals never existed. Western history is philosophically and ideologically tense. Let’s not pretend otherwise.
That said, I don’t think I’m cherry picking *that* much. More often than not, the history of the enlightenment and beyond, the *great humanist tradition* that Mac Donald embraces so vehemently, absolutely is one that often rejects power and portrays a certain skepticism. From Descartes to Cervantes to Shakespeare, from Nietzsche, who asked how we could construct morality in a godless world, to Darwin, whose work questions the teleological notion that we are here for a reason distinct from natural processes, to Freud, who questioned our control over our own minds and thoughts, the most formative works of the enlightenment and post-enlightenment canon are all deeply skeptical, particularly of various forms of authority.
*5) I’ve seen many more PragerU videos than you probably have. It seems to me that what you’re describing here isn’t the unanimous position of the channel but just one trend. Doesn’t that take the steam out of your argument?*
It’s hard to see why such a thing would impact my argument. My purpose here wasn’t to examine the entire body of PragerU. Rather, I’m more interested in one specific narrative that seems quite important to the channel.
*6) You've torn down the work of PragerU without introducing any better ideas yourself. What do you think we should design policy around? Is there an objective good, and if so, how do you know?*
First, I think it's important to recognize that not all critical things have to give a better answer. PragerU has a bunch of bad ideas and it's worthwhile to say so on the face of it. Talking about my thoughts on this issue would demand another hour and a half of your time, and I don't think it'd be worth it.
Second, and I'll keep this brief, I do think there exists an objective morality, but not one that exists outside humanity. When I say "objective morality," I mean morality relative to the human condition. In my view, there are two essential things about human nature to take into consideration when deciding if an act is right or wrong. First, the desire people have to experience good things, to have the things we want and need and to follow the plans we like (consequentialism). Second, the desire people have to be seen as ends unto themselves, to not be used as pawns or instruments (deontology). I won't be substantiating these two claims here, because it would literally take the rest of my day. I highly recommend taking an ethics class yourself, though. It's good to come to your own conclusions on these things, I think.
*7) Euthyphro discusses a pantheon of gods who are neither omniscience nor omnipotent. Prager is discussing the Christian God who not only controls all reality but also constitutes all reality. Considering that, assuming the Christian God, can't our moral facts be grounded in him?*
Well, no. It's true that if God constitutes the entire universe, then of course, any moral law that exists is, in some sense, an invention of god. That said, if God said the sun revolved around the earth, he’d be wrong. The reason for this being that although the claim “the earth revolves around the sun” might be determined by god (he created both, after all), he doesn’t decide whether the claim is or isn't true. If he wanted to change the facts, he’d have to change the orientation of the celestial bodies. If there is an objective morality and it doesn’t function in a similar way, if it’s God’s decrees, rather than facts about his creation, that ultimately determine what is moral, then morality is arbitrary. Put another way, the question is this: How would God change moral facts if he wanted to? By decreeing a change in what is good or by changing the fundamental nature of humanity. The former falls in line with Socrates' first case, the latter falls in line with his second.
Big Joel I totally read that.
Yeah, PragerU doesn't make the best arguments and they constantly use sophistry rather than actual logically consistent arguments to support the claims they make.
There is a video that they use a brasilian guy to tell that socialims destroy Brasil (thats how we write in Brasil), but as a brasilian guy myself i can tell things are not that simple.
Mind pinning this?
Whoops thought I had
Rockefeller was a nice guy. He was *so* nice, that he got the nickname "the robber baron". That is a nice name that nice people are called.
So if I nickname you "robber baron" that means you are not a nice person?
@@lacedemonians no, but if a large group of people give you that nickname and it is prevalent enough to be passed down in the history books, well-that's not a good look certainly. probably not a great dude
@@kyris0 - The so called "robber barons" emerged in the late 19th C when there was much potential for generating wealth and many unskilled laborers. However, as goods were mass produced and demand for skilled labor increased, then prices dropped and labor had leverage to make demands. Rockefeller, Ford, Carnegie were great philanthropists.
@@lacedemonians Did you miss the whole Ludlow Massacre thing?
@Anakin Skywalker That doesn’t make any sense. Sure, those people gave a bunch of unemployed people jobs and skills in manufacturing, but they were not philanthropist. The jobs that they gave were hard, long, and payed little, and most of the time, the workers really had no choice to find a different job, they didn’t have any other skills or weren’t educated enough due to systemic problems of the time. I know for a fact that you didn’t do any research and just fell into conservative rhetoric without thinking for yourself. You literally just called an anti-semite a philanthropist.
My U.S. History teacher (who I should note is a Republican) actually used the PragerU Rockefeller video _in class_ as an example of _biased_ history.
That teacher then preceded to teach us about Rockefeller's shady business practices, & the stuff ignored in that video.
Very cool
That’s very cash money of your teacher, maybe cash money isn’t the right term
That's a sign of a good teacher. Being able to have their own political & economic beliefs yet being able to critical of their faults!
That's actually a genius use of a Prager U in school.
Jonah Epstein that's awesome. I like that your teacher debunked it.
Prageru be like “you claim to protest air pollution and yet you exhale carbon dioxide. #liberallogic”
01284 wait are you for real rn
Terry’s a goddamn psychic then.
Welcome to Turning Point USA.
This is a great metaphor. Can also apply to when people call socialists hypocrites for having smart phone's or something
I Agree lol
I'm European and I hadn't heard of pragerU before, but it seems like a primary example of "if it's said with confidence in a serious voice over a infographic, people will believe it"
@Alan Hyde USA 🤢🤮
@Alan Hyde great, I’m proud to be European but there is no need to call Europe gross
As a european I always wondered from where our far right got their stupid ass ideas.
Turns out pragerU and the american right in general
@@GreedPainLove I’m pretty sure they got it from the n@zi party at this point
@Alan Hyde why would you be proud to be born in some country you didn't chose?
"Don't try and fix the world" sounds like the advice of someone who has a vested interest in never letting the world get better.
almost like,, they are funded by an oil baron foundation that wants to continue being übermega-rich 👀
almost..
@@thatsdisco no way! that money comes without any strings attached, they're being funded by oil barons to spread lies and disinformation because they're just good at it. ;-)
His lecture sounded like the mantra of a fictional dystopian society’s overlords.
I honestly think he believes that. It's just that he seems to miss that it should apply to him too.
@@superxxamadeus4098 It truly has become almost impossible to tell the actual right wing discourse from parodies and fiction showing why and how it's wrong. Even conservatives can't tell the difference. They are constantly misinterpreting creative works anyway.
"Stop blaming others for your problems."
Unless it's poor people, minorities, activists, liberals, government regulators, journalists, etc.
Don't forget the "Marxists"
@@cam4636 The people he listed aren’t Marxist?
@@groovyllicious no, they're not. Not always at least. I can think of like fifteen different journalists that are far from being maxists alone, what's your point
@@groovyllicious not inherently
@@nubbs4753 damn. My joke kinda sucks
I am particularly irritated with this fantasy that anyone could possibly make a billion dollars 'on their own'
I can make a billion dollars on my own! It's called counterfeiting
Well its not interesting to see the hundreds of investors in a company. By sticking to 1 person, story is more interesting, captivating and inspiring. If you want the real story, then a quick search is all you need.
Well ultimately not much can be accomplished on your own, we only say they made billions ‘on their own’ because they were the main driving force behind those billions
It’s kind of like how we have superstar sports athletes, while most if not the whole team is necessary to win a game some players can take more of the credit as they were more pivotal in the game and played a greater effect
Yet many have. It doesn't mean no one else worked. But they have worked longer and before others joined them. Besides worked in a small office for 18 hours a day before he got off the ground. He had an idea and worked on it. It didn't shoot from the ground
@@edwinamendelssohn5129 Not really many. Only 2,668 on a planet of roughly 7 billion, like 3.8%. I'm sure some of them worked hard, but the more you peer into it, the more generational wealth you see at the beginning of these stories and the more graft you find interwoven into their narratives. It's a self-serving narrative the rich like to, at the very least, not dispell, as to keep the rest of us chugging along on the treadmill that powers their wealth, hoping that one day, maybe we can get there, even if it is statistically impossible.
According to Jordan Peterson, he should stop confronting political correctness and teaching people how to live in general, and focus on himself instead
Sounds good to me.
@@raymondfarinas3169 Someone should really point out the rafter in his eye, then, I think he needs it looked at
He didn't took that advise to seriously to himself, and they were people superior than him when there was a Q&A.
He should probably go clean his room
No, no, he's one of the high-IQ elites that _deserve_ to decide policy, unlike those listless, stupid, underdeveloped poor and ethnic minorities.
It's only the ungrateful underclass that makes up most of the population that should shut up and work harder. The smart, white, rich men at the top should keep making decisions for you the same as they always have.
This woman really said humanities course shouldn't include learning about the experiences of other humans
ities course
Learn about how great the classics are, just don’t ask why.
We wouldn't want to humanize historically oppressed individuals... ahhaha...ahah.....haa
@@jodiejodiejodie we might accidentally have empathy if we do that.
💀💀💀💀
Optimist: “The glass is half full”
Pessimist: “The glass is half empty”
PragerU: “The glass is a leftist”
More like
Prager U: OBEY GLASS OBEY!!!!
Engineer: The glass is double the required capacity.
Schrodinger: The glass is both full and empty
If you tax the glass less, if will be fuller!
hahaha this was too good
I’m really annoyed by the condescending way the people in prager U videos speak, is that just me?
The scary thing, though, is that it works. If people don't have their critical thinking glasses on, plus if they're conned by the 'U' in the name, the authoritative way the talking heads are speaking can subtly make their points sound 'obvious'.
Am snek 616 yeah, it’s a way of making them seem smarter than you and making their points sound obvious.
dudeee i only ever see the ads but i always watch the whole thing bc the vibe just makes me so angry
PragerU is for the smug libertarian white dudes who talk over people in debates and went to a Christian or Catholic college to major in classical liberal arts
I’m what condescending way? I genuinely want to know. I watch PragerU occasionally and take it seriously and I’d like to talk about it. A civil conversion if you will
"If you're doing something wrong, stop."
- Jordan Peterson
*(rousing applause)*
Damn Jordan, never thought of that one before.
Sam o'nella academy has more right to call itself academy than prageru has calling itself university
i get all my knowledge from daddy sam
Am I the only on who thought his name was salmonella academy
@@theathleticgeek4123 he gets that a lot
I mean I wouldn't know about Tycho Brahe's deer without him, and that is essential learning.
@@admiralofcuteness the knowledge of Tarrare eating through everything during the War of the first coalition led me to learn the french revolutionaires fought for their republic against all the europeans monarchies with no organized army and won, and that France proceeded to kick Europe's monarchist butts (but specially Britain's) 4 more times in less than 15 years. Big respect. It really changed my views.
I miss our boi Sam.
PragerU: "You should stop trying to fix society because it's not our place, so any way here's how *I* think we can fix society."
But.. society belongs... to us, the people... what?
J. C. Clearly you’re not up to the task
@@experimentalpunk21
What task?
J. C. Fixing society. There’s no reason to believe you’re up to the task. Just sayin. But you can eat more fresh fruits and vegetables! And get that fuckin sweet jet ski everyone else on your block has.
-.-
@@experimentalpunk21
No one person is. It's a team effort.
Without unregulated capitalism and robber barons, we wouldn't have JD Rockerfeller.
Without JD Rockerfeller, we wouldn't have Rockerfeller Street.
Without Rockerfeller Street, we wouldn't have Rockerfeller Street [Nightcore].
Without Rockerfeller Street [Nightcore], we wouldn't have Rockerfeller Street [Nightcore] Crab Rave Remix.
Without Rockerfeller Street [Nightcore] Crab Rave Remix, we wouldn't have Rockerfeller Street [Nightcore] Crab Rave Remix 10 hours.
And I just don't want to live in a world without that.
Checkmark Libruls 😤
What about the Rockefeller Skunk?
This comment is more convincing than anything PragerU has cooked up.
Leftwingdestroyed.jpg
*_[I can officially say I have been checkmarked, darn it]_*
You know what? You got me.
Every Jordan Peterson quote just sounds like a cartoon villain. "you can't change the world! Why would you even think you're strong enough for that?"
Literally, lmao, he just sounds goofy as fuck, too. Idk why literally anyone takes that guys takes as worth their weight in salt... I guess because they're shared out of context on Facebook w/ inspiration porn music in the background, and if you remove enough context he sounds like he is making generic, """common sense""" statements... ya know, the kind of videos that Facebook lives off of, lol.
@@facelessdrone I never liked him after he told me to clean my room in one of his videos
I never realized how funny and true that is.
@Jason The people who like him don't get out of context clips of his speeches. They listen to his speeches. Those who hate him get their information from out of context soundbites, or they genuinely don't like what they hear, which is understandable in those rare cases. I notice the people who dislike Jordan Peterson also dislike whoever else they're told they're supposed to dislike. Funny how that works.
@@FluffyBunny9002 no buddy people just have different opinions and world views and some of Jordan Petersons ideas are just.... Eugh.
"Rockefeller was good to his laborers" I didn't know PragerU was a comedy channel.
Dark humor is the best.
I'm surprised Bill O'Reilly didn't do that lesson
+Dream
Good to his laborers, shoots up his unions - you can't explain that!
@@KingBobXVI it's called lying
Give me a break!
No, seriously, give me a break. I work for Rockefeller and I've been at this for 14 hours straight. Just 4 more to go and I can collect my quarter in pay!
reasons why prageru should exist:
1. an example of what not to do when you grow up
2. Content for juicy ytps
Why shouldn’t you be a kind, rationally thinking, hard working, adult? That doesn’t make sense to me
There’s no reason for not being a kind, rationally thinking, hard working adult.
Unless you watch Prager-U unironically.
Some of their videos do make sense but a lot of them are literally just right-wing propaganda.
"Have you ever pushed a beach ball underwater? What happens? It pop right back up!"
"Have you ever pushed a baby underwater? What happens? *THE BABY FUCKING DIES!*"
Which ones are propaganda? I’m genuinely asking so I can review them again
Mr_Sparkly_Face for example, the British empire one. You can find many examples (videos) of why this video is very bad, and another one is the Charlottesville riots video.
Not a historian but i have made it my life's goal to defame Rockefeller
You go defame that greedy bastard.
Ok liberal
@@Brad-qw1te why do you have your face buried in the comment section of a video you don't even want to watch?
@@Brad-qw1te "credibility" is for those who present facts whitout justification, this man did not present fact he critically analyzed a topic showing is arguments. The "credibility"(if can even be called that) comes from either you spot flaws on his argumentation or not.
The problem is: to spot flaws in a argument you have critically think(essentially to doubt everything) about it, and "thinking" is a big no no for doctrinalism.
@@Brad-qw1te how much time did you waste in the comments section?
“I don’t want a nation of thinkers. I want a nation of workers”
-JD Rockefeller
And if I only knew what he really meant by that. It is true that the ability to DO something is likely better than just thinking but never doing.
@@slydog7131 Ironically enough, your comment proves that Rockefeller’s class was at least partially successful in creating a nation of unthinking workers. A typical stream of meaningless nonsense.
The tiny minority people who have the “ability” (AKA power) to do AND think whatever they want in our society rely on the rest of us to perform and manage the productive labour without thinking too much about who controls the value that our labour imparts. This is apparent to anyone with eyes and a brain, but many (including yourself) are so captured by ideology that we would rather twist our brain in knots defending capitalism than acknowledge the material reality that surrounds us. This class blindness makes you incapable of thinking or doing anything that isn’t in accordance with the capitalist realist ideology that you subconsciously subscribe to.
"But how do I *know* your values are good?"
"Dude, just trust me, bro."
"Noooo don't question my world views ur so sexy haha"
@@carloscastro1192 I did a little correction to your comment:
"I think many conservatives views and values are statements explained by god"
Here we go again.
His values aren't something he invented in his basement. He proposes Judeo-Christian values, on which America was founded. So you want to challenge them by asking "how do I know they are good", and won't be satisfied when told that God said so, go make your own country, with what you believe to be good and compare it to America 200 years later and see how worse off your people are.
Have you ever picked up a philosophy book to attack anyone's values? You *know* these values work because americans are among the freest and the most prosperous people on the planet. If having a good life for everyone in a country doesn't indicate the worth of the said country's values, what does according to you?
“Why don’t you stop doing things that are wrong?” Jackson parkerson
I mean, my values came straight from some dusty book several thousand yea--I mean, straight from my imaginary frie--straight from God. They have to be right.
"If he did so much good in his time, why is he remembered as a greedy capitalist?" Uh, maybe because he was a greedy capitalist.
omg trans flag pog
@@sadhootyhoothoot3306 Based af
Yes.
Indeed
Hey I'm trans too
"Be complacent, be obedient, be grateful, know your place, don't make trouble, don't ask too many questions, accept the status-quo, listen to what we tell you."
--- Every authoritarian regime ever existed left or right.
Yep, yep. He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present now controls the past.
@@OneLostTexan What happened in Portland?
You just described the right in one paragraph
Bigus Dickus yep
Authoritarian regimes eliminate politics so there is no longer a right or a left, one party, one figurehead. Soviets were not left, Nazis were not right, they were both authoritarian. Enemies were there at the start-the Tsars in Russia, communists for Nazis-but once eliminated leftist and rightist programs are not pursued.
Damn, you know what, maybe Dennis is onto something with the whole “the government should make policy to increase gratitude” thing because I can think of literally no better way for the government to do that than by making sure that all people perpetually have access to things like healthcare, housing, and the means to meet all other needs. I mean, I know I’d be pretty grateful if the government stopped allowing people to go into medical debt.
It's almost as if most first world countries already provide that
@@stephenfiler3204 WAIT WHAT🤯🤯
@@MigattenoBlakae Yee-up. America is one of the last first world countries that doesn't have some form of centralized healthcare or single-payer healthcare system for all of its citizens. European countries typically have better social safety nets too which leads to less homelessness- and less crime!
"But the taxes are too high!" is usually the retort. Except by the time you add health insurance premiums, deductibles, copays, coinsurance, and drug costs to our taxes? We pay more. For worse results. A lot of Europe lives longer than us
“The British weren’t that oppressive.”
Africa, Native Americans, N.A Colonists, The Caribbean, & Asia: 👀
I think he's tryna say that they weren't that oppressive to the American colonists
Look at India the amount of massacres is insane
Also hawaii
Also Ireland
Don't forget Australia
I am convinced that people who laud Shakespeare while dismissing things like gender, race, and sexuality studies, have never actually read a single play by Shakespeare
Mfw Shakespeare was the original SJW by having a moor be the main character in a play.
Or a biography on him for that matter.
And yet Shakespeare was able to communicate nuance and ideas in such a way where there wasn't detriment to the stories portrayed or obnoxious pandering to a particular base or group. Othello is a fantastic example of this - though it is important to know most Shakespeare plays were the saucy romcoms of their day and yet masterpieces from the father of the modern English language, not some overblown representation bollocks that is made to sell a product to (insert token group here) like you see nowadays from studios and news outlets.
@@AdHocWholius So is your position on modern mass media that there isn't anything that doesn't pander?
What exactly do you mean by overblown representation bollocks? are you implying stand-in characters for the audience are bad?
I don't know what your comment is saying other than Shakespeare=good, TV/movies=bad
I'm only familiar with shakespeare mostly from highschool english I'd like to hear more of your thoughts on it.
@ Julian Stainton why do you anti-sjws have such a problem with seeing non-white, lgbt characters in the media? oh, that’s right, because you hate having attention diverted from your ideal of normal white straight people. minorities ARE normal, everyday people. the fact a character is black or a lesbian shouldn’t take away from your enjoyment of the story, unless you have a particular problem with these groups of people... :^/
I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again: if a person’s reasoning for not killing others is based only on the fact the Bible said not to kill I’ll be terrified of them. If the only thing stopping you from harming others is a command from an authority figure you submit to, then I question you and your morals. If I ever kill someone it will either be a necessary, unavoidable defense of self or others. I will never go out of my way to harm another person, I’m sure other people have similar position. The majority of people don’t hurt others because they are capable of empathy. They don’t need a god to tell them that murder is bad, they understand it simply by relating to the possible loss and suffering that murder causes. People don’t like pain, people feel each other’s pain, people avoid causing pain.
PragerU lives in a hella creepy little world
Our Constitution was founded on God giving us rights and not the government. If government doesn't give us rights they cannot take them away. Yes people need to be told what to do. Children need to learn right from wrong. We are children of God. And yes people do still murder with the killing of innocent babies and call it 'pro choice'. Murder is still being done today in China (forced abortions, organ harvesting of falun gong, genocide and concentration camps of Uyghurs,). Prove the Resurrection was false if you don't believe in God. Many atheists, agnostics have tried but can't. Also, look up near death experiences. The US was the first to get rid of Slavery March 1807 followed by Britain. Only 2.5% of slaves went to the US the # 1 was Portugal Brazil. THe US was the first to ban Slavery. 94 nations today have not banned slavery. You can only get to God through Jesus Christ. THe world is a broken place without the people coming back to God and Jesus. Get ready for your God given rights to be taken away by the Government.
@@godisthewayandtruth7759
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't the "chosen by god" and "keep to authority" more the monarchies gig?
Wasn't the US a fucking Democracy? Not by god, by the people?
Also:
SEPERATION. OF. CHURCH. AND. STATE.
@@godisthewayandtruth7759 wasnt the rights in the constitution based off of philosophers such as john locke?
also, abortions arent done on babies, they are done on cells. they wont let you get an abortion if it's too late. people kill poor innocent animals for food and survival all the time, so why not kill unformed clumps of cells for the mothers survival and well being?
No people murder all the time that's why we have prison systems because the Federal government is punishing them. And yes Children need to be taught right from wrong. You were brought up by the Judeo Christian values of time and this country.
@Leonard Wolf I will pray for you and your anger.
Peterson’s argument sure sounds like someone saying “how dare you try to do the right thing? Just sit back and let the oppressors oppress.”
Who are the oppressors and who are they oppressing?
Indeed
@@cockoffgewgle4993 Just look throughout history. This world is always far from even being good, much less perfect or ideal. Without certain people, this world would be different. Without Gandi, India would still be under British rule or at least liberated later. Without MLK, civil rights in America would at least be delayed.
Peterson's argument really only works in a flawless society in which all systems work perfectly and the only limits are the morals and actions of individual people.
@@Pepsi-Mann21 I meant now.
@@cockoffgewgle4993 Is society flawless now?
What I find most interesting about the Rockefeller quote is this: the thing we most remember Rockefeller for is because it's the thing that had the most historical impact on society. Him being a good father matters to *only* his family. Him being philanthropic matters to the charities he gave his money to and the people they helped. Him being a brutal capitalist that may well have been a part of a massacre, whose business practices were so unacceptable that legislation was passed specifically to deal with them? That matters to pretty much everyone in the US today.
History is *supposed* to teach you the most important things. What PragerU wants to do is redefine what "most important" means. They want to drag in that unpleasant conservative clap-trap about "good people, therefore good deeds" nonsense, and then declare that this is the most important thing.
that first paragraph is a really good approach to understanding historical figures when weighing the good they did vs the bad they did
Yet for some reason History classes like to approach things from a crooked angle with an objective of skewing history to a certain political perspective.
PraguerU is no different than any other history class. They indulge in semantics to lose the bigger picture and then spin it in a way that promotes their political goals. Case and point is a video talking about the Republican Party, which for some reason can’t accept the idea of a political party changing based on its affiliation with Dixiecrats. They love to focus on its ties to abolitionists and southern reform rather than looking at more contemporary history (I.E 20th century). Which just so happens to be more relevant...
As far as providing an example of skewed mentality in most history classes. If you go up to the common person and ask them, “how many people died in the Holocaust?” Most people will answer with 7 million, truth be told the answer is somewhere short of 13 million. The 7 million figure is the amount of Jewish people killed during the Holocaust. What this demonstrates here is pretty obvious, there is a prioritization of which group suffered the most to the point where most people believe that only Jews suffered during the Holocaust. And as a result 6 million other persecuted victims of various groups (comprised of: polish, Ukrainian, political dissidents, and other minorities) are completely ignored.
The way I see it, calling out PraguerU is the equivalent of calling out your history teacher or professor for dramatizing the point. Yes, you can stand up and condemn them, but in my own experience of calling out my history teachers on bullshit. It rarely works and only serves to make you look like a politically charged idiot. The best thing to do is to leave it and let it rot with the rest of the garbage it rolls in. At the end of the day, history is subjective and manipulating it to your own gain is something that EVERYONE does, no exceptions.
@@emilie6466 I think that even if it's something that a lot of people do, we should still try to avoid it.
PragerU: Values are based on feelings
Also PragerU: Values are more important than feelings
LOL. Good one @MegaNova Shizzle. lol
I watched most of their videos, not once they ever mentioned that.
They literally say these things in clips used in this exact video.
They must have pointed out that the Left thinks Feelings are more important than Value, from all the videos I've seen.
@G00ober Exactly. They contradicted themselves when trying to debunk leftist talking points.
Even from a religious perspective I have ALWAYS hated the "morality comes from the Bible because God told us these rules" stance. The rules aren't just there for fun and if you have to be told murder is wrong to believe it, you're a sociopath. The reason the rules were the way they were is because they were guidelines on how to effectively love. The number one most important thing according to the Christian faith is to love, and (for the most part) the rules are a way to let you know how to do that. It's such a fundamental misunderstanding of religion to say that the rules are there, don't question just follow
Fundamentalist Christians dont give a damn about love
I don't think the statement "Morality comes from the Bible" is bad...I guess it is a good platform for "Objective morality."
if "Objective morality" ever existed that is...I don't think Murder is inherently wrong, I think if society didn't exist we wouldn't be able to say "Murder is bad." Morality wouldn't have existed if society wouldn't have existed. Of course also there lies the burden of proof as to why Christianity/Judaism/Mormonism is true so that why should the Bible be held the basis for our morals. But I am tired because I have watched a lot of debates on religion and God today so I am gonna let one that go free...
Also just before anyone starts saying it, yes I feel bad for the person being murdered and I hate the murderer but that my feelings aren't a good basis for what is right or wrong. Everyone has different perspectives, what makes your perspective right? I think we can logically debunk why murder is bad.
@@LukeMcGuireoides as I heard someone say I am gonna repeat it here, when did Calvinists takeover Christianity? For this case, when and how did Fundamentalists takeover Christianity?
They took it over in the US. They mainly did it through infiltrating the Republican party. The christian right here overshadows non fundy christian to such an extent as to nearly blotting them out. It's a sin. It's a m effing shame
it also doesn't help prove their argument when you stop and reflect on the fact that just about every major religious figure (jesus christ, moses, prophet muhammad peace be upon him) were literally rebelling against rigid authority. jesus against the romans, moses against the pharaoh's regime, muhammad (pbuh) against the pagan worshippers and rulers of then saudi arabia who wanted him dead.
like, religion is literally all about faith in god above tyrannical government
This video snapped me out of a spiral two years ago when prageru indoctrinated me with propaganda and I felt so embarrassed after I realized what had happened to me and how much I lost myself in the process.
Glad you're out of it. Truly.
@@WhistleAndSnap thx :)
That's amazing! Most people would double down! You did not.
But yes. Prager U is just another sick way for the rich to brainwash the poor. It makes me angry.
When i was 12/13 prageru would give me ads and since i hadn’t developed much skepticism and it had U in the title i thought it was an online college so i just took everything they said as fact. Thankfully i am away from all of that now and this video is a part of many videos(that i have watched) showing the amount of propaganda prageru used and how their claims fall a part with just a little bit of thought
Good that you learned, unfortunately, some people dont
I once got a PragerU ad that said that I was oppressing some dude by saying "Happy Holidays" instead of "Merry Christmas". Like, bruh. I don't know what holiday you celebrate, regardless that a good majority celebrates Christmas. Even then, holidays can be plural, encompassing Christmas and New Years.
But were just MILLENIAL LIBTARD SNOWFLAKES WHO GET OFFENDED by EVERYING
Right? I don’t get how so many people in the US are so upset about “Happy holidays”. Most people here in Germany say it, because it encompasses New Years as well.
Mina The Raichu
saying happy holidays makes yOu A DiSgRAcE and you are RUiNiNG aMeRiCaN cULtURe
I remember getting that advertisement too and couldn’t believe how stupid it was.
@@winkwonk1247 we are DESTROYING WESTERN CIVILIZATION (whatever the hell that's even supposed to mean)
@Graknorke And it's also cool how the values of Muslim culture can be completely brought down by just calling it barbaric. Biased much?
Young Stanley Kubrick sitting in his gran's living room has a point
lmao
stanley kubrick formulating ideas for 2001: A Space Odyssey 8:40
My conservative business professor starts off a unit on Rockefeller introducing him as "Not a Very Nice Guy"
I'm religious, but I can't put into words how frustrating Dennis' use of religion is.
Exactly
Churches in general are greedy. My former church wanted me to pay tithing every year. Becoming an atheist means I don't have to give my hard earned money to a greedy clergy. Religion is a trillion dollar industry. It's a business and churches should be taxed like every other business. George Carlin was right!
You use religion as a scalpel, he uses it as a slegehammer to beat others over the head with it
@@GenerationX1984 If you need George Carlin (RIP), to tell you that, then, i and many other Motorists thank you, for keeping your Eyes, on the Road, as there are many "Give our God Business some damn money or go to Hell. Have a nice Day."--Billboards, a lot. "Teyethesores."
As a practicing catholic i have become frustrated with how people use their religion.
They use it as a source of power divide people and so on.
Both sides of my family are strong catholics my mom dad and grandma taught me that being kind and helpful to everyone is what jesus would want.
Being mean and rasist is satan's work.
Pragur: "murder is wrong!"
Justice system: *removes death sentence*
Pragur: "no, not like that"
“End the imperialist wars abroad!” “No, not like that”
Some folks need a killin’....
@@washada Would war crimes count?
You can`t compare the two, wtf!?
@@90skidcultist am I misunderstanding the death penalty? do they not die?
"Inopportune questioning can confuse without enlightening". And this guy's supposed to be a teacher. smh
Yeah, honestly, he’s a professor! His job is to address confusion and turn it into knowledge. This philosophy encourages students to just bluntly regurgitate old information without truly learning
Crowe3717 when is questioning inopportune? What if I question at the right opportunity? Then will it confuse me? Even if it does, so what? What is confusion? Is it harmful? If so, can it be demonstrated? Is a kid in class who’s engaged yet confused impossible of attaining further enlightenment? What is enlightenment? Are these questions Socrates would ask? Who is Socrates? Am I Socrates?
Yeah and also a "philosopher" somehow because you know that is exactly the only area of knowledge that doesnt go around questioning the act of questioning itself just for the sake of questioning
"Inopportune questioning" = questioning that challenges things I endorse.
Why?
Gaslight. Obstruct. Project.
That is what passes for curriculum on PragerU.
Those words come together to form G.O.P. The Good Ol' Racist Sexist Capitalists.
Sounds like textbook liberalism to be honest.
GOP-642
Class: Prager
Or, GOP
@@billcephus 'Conservatives' are liberals. They wish to preserve/regress a neoliberal economic/cultural zeitgeist.
I honestly find the gratitude thing hilarious. Like, I'm pretty sure loads of people would be grateful for policies that forgive student debt and grant access to free health care and housing, Dennis. What's that? That's not what you mean? Oh, okay.
Exactly what I was thinking. That's the biggest hole for me.
Not to mention it totally runs counter to the “always strive to do better” and the “work harder and smarter” capitalist rhetoric they are shoving.
If I’m suppose to be grateful for what I have then what reason do I have to “work harder and smarter and stop being so gosh darn lazy all the time” then if I’m not allowed to want more then what I have? There is no reason to give blood to the market gods then if I can’t expect to work hard to get more.
It’s classic doublethink.
Okay, but I have a question where does that money go and come from? It has to come from somewhere. The government? The government is built on us so that money comes from us.
@@trevorlee7953 see this is that good faith thing Joel was talking about. You know very well that it’s complicated and explaining it here is just stupid! A waste of time…especially when you have google right there, right?
I bet there’s someone smarter than me, that knows exactly what they’re talking about, and they’re written a concise plan to explain the question you just asked.
I’ll make it as simple as I can for you tho, ok?
Medical care is a scam, insurance is a scam, lots of people get Medicaid or other “free” healthcare. So when my kid slams a finger in the door, my garbage ER will rake in money and provide almost nothing, then I follow up and the specialist cuz the ER is a joke.
They give us some X-rays a $10 aluminum brace and ice pack and some advice, I give them a thank you and leave… and you pay the $75k. That’s all just the private medical racquet tho.
Most folks don’t have a doctor. Period. They get 0 care until they go to the ER, which costs tens of thousands each time, when regular medical could keep a person more healthy, thus preventing emergency care.
The real problem is the profits over people model, when we punish others in the way we’re doing, it makes our communities weaker. You can do as much work as you want but when you rest of the neighborhood goes to shit then you go right along with it
@Lex Bright Raven, you’re not wrong on the highest bidder. The government and politicians are heavily based on money. I feel politicians are bound to mess up because they are usually rich and out of touch with the people.
The way I see his value system of gratitude is creating a subservient lower class who is brainwashed into being grateful even when they’re being screwed over
Waste not want not.
Be grateful for what you have so that you appreciate it more deeply. Be grateful you're not worse so that you can find relief. Be grateful of your opportunities so that you have the chance to act and *then* act to improve your life. To remain idle in the face of challenge is foolish but to remain bitter in the face of prosperity is perhaps more foolish. This is the central idea.
I, for instance, have applied this to water. I live where the water is very clean and adopting this mentality of gratitude has made it more pleasant, almost delicious, to drink it.
Now I ask you, when's the last time you've had a drink of water?
@FiddleRiddle DiddleDiddle way to completely talk around his point
@@fiddleriddlediddlediddle Humans have to drink water everyday or they'll die. What do you mean by:''when's the last time you've had a drink of water''?
Adultism on a societal level: How dare you not be grateful and simply settle for what you have under my roof! I feed you and clothe you and pay for you - yes I also decide for your existence but that doesn't mean you don't have all responsibility for being alive and being born and being happy and owe me everything. Now do my work for me and be ashamed for wanting to be treated like a human being and to not feel shitty you ungrateful slug.
You probably had to watch a lot of PragerU videos to make this. Truly a noble sacrifice if I've ever seen one
He might actually learn something useful.
@@billcephus *Is Murder Wrong?*
@@billcephus How Dennis Prager is the worst human being in the entire world is a useful lesson
@billcephus yeah like how to disdain the struggles of your fellow humans.
Tune in next time when we discuss PragerU's video "Adolf Hitler: Was he really as bad as history says he is?" and its correspondence to defending Trump.
Omg I would love to see a ytp of that 😆😂
you joke now but do you really think PragerU wouldn't justify the guy because he "was religious" or something like that?
Physical, hahahaha. I could definitely see them making that video if it was around 1940. Even if it came 9ut today...I wouldnt be shocked at all
I hope this doesn't age badly, especially in 2023-2024.
@@Goldenboy-pe2ci Hitler wasn't religious really but sure they are gonna cherry pick quotes from him just like they did with the American founding fathers to "prove" America was a Christian nation....
There's one small, inconsequential line from this that really get stuck in my head. "It is the loving duty we *owe* those writers, artists, and thinkers who works made our world possible."
I know it's got nothing to do with the point Big Joel is making, but this sticks with me because it's describing something fundamental about conservatism that I've seen crop up over and over, most notably in conversations about the removal of statues. Conservatives believe, or at least act as if they believe, that "great" people are owed certain treatment from society. Shakespeare *deserves* to be taught to students, not because there are valuable lessons contained within his works but because he was important and has earned the right to be memorialized. To ignore Shakespeare is to disrespect him, not give him the adulation that is his due. Confederate generals earned their statues by being important men and it is unfair of us to take that which they earned away from them. It even applies to conversations about people like the founding fathers; it's why they claim it is unfair to judge historical figures by today's standards when it comes to monuments and statues. To the conservative mind those statues don't exist for us, they exist for the people they depict. That is George Washington's statue, and we cannot take it away from him because we have decided that things which were commonplace during his time are wrong today.
I'm not going anywhere with this, just wanted to get it out of my head.
You reminded me of an amazing line from a conservative broadcaster covering a story about if a memorial parade should be explicitly religious or not
And one talking head said "If these atheists don't believe in the afterlife...who are they even parading for?" as if the idea was that we hold memorial events for the ghosts of people in heaven to watch.
Wish I could find it because it was truly jaw-dropping
That seems like a form of idolatry, something Christians allegedly despise
Great Man History is the belief that history is the story of those born as "Great Men." Common examples of people considered "Great Men" today are Shakespeare and Tolstoy. However, Tolstoy himself was one of the greatest opponents of Great Man History, stating in War and Peace that: "He [Napoleon] is no Great Man. None of us are Great Men."
I came here after getting their ad. It wasn’t the first time but being a minority who has an actual brain I was actually pissed off that something like this establishment exists. I watched an ad about how females are scoring better at males in school. Which is like ok maybe we can improve the schooling system. But then they go on to say how it’s biased to female preferences and how females are into fiction, poetry and reading complicated texts which is already a very outdated statistic. They go on to say how we should improve the school system by going back to the original way of schooling back during the industrial revolution which is the dummest thing ive ever heard. they go on to say they should let boys go back to the 1900s and the caotic behavior is just them doing their boy things and we shouldn’t stop it. But it’s ridiculous cause they’re basically promoting maintaining a patriotical society women and girls especially have been raped and abused for years by these boys who were let to do their own thing and now they are trying to convince teachers to just let it happen and not scold them when they act out of line because it’s “natural”. They topped it off with homophobia in the end of the ad and I was done with them
God damn...why did I get fooled by them at one point? I think I saw one of their less horrible videos and thought "eh, sounds cool bro", welp, time to unsubscribe from THAT trainwreck.
@@ramenbomberdeluxe4958 you fully recovered yet?
Great comment, Jessica! Tysm for sharing ;)
You really put a smile on my face.
Not surprised
Prager: "Good values are what you need most ".
Us: "Which values are the good ones?".
Prager: "Mine, of course".
Us: "And which are yours?".
Prager: "The ones in the Bible, basically".
Us: "Are you sure you want to call it a 'university', Dennis?"
I love the chapter in The Bible that goes "The wealthy American man knows what's up, forget Jesus and his teachings and example. Loving thy neighbor is for the week leftists!"
Fr religion has no place being taught in education. The only time it should even be brought up is if you're discussing the history of it.
@@AammaK Great.
@@zayatamburelli5322 The study of religion is a field of study you know? Where I live RE (ReligION education) is basically information about the main religion, that obviously effects the local culture so much it would be silly not to explain it in school, and most other religions are presented as well so as to understand domestic minority cultures and to prepare us to eventually interact with foreign countries and people from other cultures.
It's also fundamental to be informed about religion, sociology of religion, psychology of belief and ideology, and the origins of sacred texts and practices. You can't really be expected to have a fair discussion on or even critique your backround religion nor any other if you can't understand where things come from. History isn't enough because it's good to know why people think like they do, why such tiny things become detrimental for the unity of a religious group and splits it in multiple traditions. Dogmatics too can be taught neutrally. Only when it becomes a sermon is there something wrong with it. Frankly, that does happen in less populated areas and our local "Bible belt" zone.
In general though, quite contradictorily those students who are members of the main church here tend to get far wider education on the diversity of religion both locally and internationally, since the different RE subjects are separated based on religion membership, and those outside religion have their own subject, but it isn't as well developed as the main RE classes. Because the other school subjects have far less pupils less resources can be directed to them as well. Philosophy and ethics are fused into RE classes in primary school. Even though education like this has long roots in my culture, it's not quite there yet. I personally support a common Religion Information subject in schools, which would make it even more neutral and fair. Religion education (in contrast to "religious education") should give tools for individual thinking and for understanding ourselves and others. We lose something fundamental if we see the teaching OF religion automatically as religious conduct.
Educating about religion isn't necessarily wrong (think of it as a philosophy/history class), but if the point of the religious education that you're getting is indoctrination, then yes, that doesn't belong in a university setting.
Tfw there's a pragerU ad on an anti-pragerU video
The same reason Tic Tok ads are on anti-Tic Tok videos. The ads find keywords in the title and boom ad.
I get adds for the impeaching trump when watching PragerU.
I got two pragerU ads on this one
Maybe they know its bad and they're like "these people obviously won't actually believe this bullshit so lets put it here" 😂
I got "Why God is a he"
My Lutheran school “Christian Life Impact” teacher decided to show us PragerU’s video “If there is no God, then murder is okay” to discuss why God is the reason behind all human morality. Hearing the “fact-based” evidence (if you can even call it that) presented, left me absolutely pissed and over all thinking “What the fuck?”. I was so confused that such a video was being presented as a reputable source, although no reputable sources were never mentioned, nor viable “evidence” provided for the claims made. It was terrifying to hear what basically sounded like “The only thing keeping me from committing murder is the bible.” Any human with basic empathetic feelings would know that a book, regarded as Holy or not, shouldn’t be the only thing holding you back, your regard for human life, and the intense emotions that come with it, should be.
Notice how they claim the richest man ever was J.D.Rockefeller, a white christian, rather than Mansa Musa (widely accepted as the actual holder of that title), a black muslim
Ziggy Angelo that was the first person I thought of as the richest man of all time.
Mansa Musa was also exaggerated.
That’s true! It’s hard to quantify his net worth accurately
I don’t think determining who was the richest man ever was the point of the video... not everything has to be a race issue
@@samsoncologne9332 I know that's not the point of the video, I'm making a point of the biased perspective PragerU uses to skew its followers view of the world
PragerU doesn't want the informed. If you're asking questions about what they're saying then you aren't their target audience.
@@supercriceto
No. If they wanted to do that then they wouldn’t publish such classic videos like “why the left ruins everything”. There is no room for interpretation there. Nothing to get you thinking. Just spoon-fed propaganda funded by fracking billionaires.
"He wasn't a greedy capitalist" but he was also "the first American Billionaire"? Somethin don't add up, chief
In their defense he didn’t actually care about the money. It was just how he kept score, so that he knew he was winning the game. And he would do anything to win.
@@bcleste That's so much worse.
Eoin Campbell for sure, he was a psychopath.
That IS capitalism. All the feelings nonsense from conservatives is just that. But it's important that YOU judge your value by your productivity, it makes it easier for them to be billionaires.
@@jeremyanderson5828 Nah some of us tryna change the world while making gettin rich
It's so funny that prageru never talked about Teddy Roosevelt, even when he's basically the embodiment of the supposed values of a supposed patriotic libertarian.
But he was crashing monopolies, and obviously the billionares who """support""" prageru don't want that to happen again
Unless it's TH-cam monopoly because muh free speech
Yep
Tbh Roosevelt is kinda badass, his name predates the teddy bear and also was a good guy
In what way is Roosevelt a patriotic libertarian?
@@giovanni4470 he wasn't, I said he embodies the supposed values of a patriotic libertarian.
Patriotism = his valiant fight for his country in Cuba during the Spanish-American war, and all around willingness to serve his country.
Libertarianism = he busted monopolies, thus making way for the (actual) free market to do its thing.
Of course libertarians nowadays don't have problems with monopolies, a lot of them are even financed by one. Regardless, a genuine free market requires frequent trust busting.
I'm not even a minute in, but wasn't Rockefeller responsible for the Ludlow Massacre?
Have I got a surprise for u
@Brigid Madden that was my first thought
+ Brigid Madden But Mansa Musa wasn’t white or Western, and we can’t have a non-Western non-capitalist black guy being the richest ever, that wouldn’t prove our point.
Yes, according to press at the time. Happened at Ludlow, Colorado, where the National Guard used machine guns to fire into the miners' colony, killing around two dozen people, including women and children. The aftermath led to an armed attack by the miners upon dozens of anti-union establishments and against the Colorado National Guard. See the Wikipedia article and this from "Westword": features.westword.com/ludlow-massacre-anniversary/
@@WASDLeftClick He was religious, though! He went on a pilgrimage to Mecca! Oh, wait...
I cackled hearing peterson say "the best way to fix the world is to not fix the world"
Do you cackle at Ghandi who said "be the change you want to see in the world"?
@@threethrushes no because Ghandi said to be the action. to directly fix the world through peace.
@@threethrushes no, because that is the exact opposite of what peterson said.
He pretty much just said "Let the world be horrible."
No kidding
It's hard to have something of substance to say about a system when your only opinion is that you don't want the system to change
Totally works both ways tho, saying you dont like the system and offering something that was proved not to work or nothing at all is also stupid as hell
Rodrigo Garcia
I have to disagree, voicing to your representatives that you don't like something is an effective motivator of change. It can make change for the better easier as well, since there aren't multiple conflicting strategies floating around, but common support around handling a problem. Example, I don't like litter in my city, I tell my elected officials, and it's their job to figure out how to fix that problem. More trash cans? More city workers picking up trash? Fines for littering? I don't actually care what solution they pick, I just want the litter gone.
that's exactly the point I was getting at. Once you decide that the system has to change, there are endless possibilities for solutions and thus endless discussion and debate on how to implement the change. When you just want everything to stay the same, there is no debate. Just like PragerU views morality: it is what it is. There's no need to argue your way is best, you just have to convince everyone that it's not worth it to try something else. The path of least resistance.
big joel loved my comment and I really feel the love
Also, addendum to my first comment: it’s not that PragerU and Jordan Peterson don’t have an opinion about the systems we live in. They do: they think they’re good. But they never want to analyze why they are “good”, either because they’re genuinely ignorant to the fact that they benefit from these systems more than others and thus can’t understand other people’s criticisms. Or they KNOW that the current system treats them better than other people and they’d like to keep it that way, but because of their moral posturing they don’t want to admit that they know what they’re doing hurts others. Lol sorry I’ll shut up now.
It amazes me just how much PragerU manages to unite people. The left, the right, religious people, non religious people. Americans and non Americans, humans and aliens, cats and dogs. All united in their distaste for PragerU. Truly inspiring.
can confirm, when i started watching this video let out the saddest snort and looked at me like "really, man?"
Its now taught at school
There are right wingers & religious people who have distaste for it?
Most of these videos fail to mention is that morality isn't all black and white. There is a grey area.
A good example is stealing food for your family. It is wrong to steal, yes, but is it wrong to steal food in order to feed your family?
@SomethingScanning How is the “steal to feed your family or face death by starvation” thought experiment a false dichotomy? It is entirely possible to find yourself in such a situation.
Yes.
@SomethingScanning False dichotomy?
Apparently you never lived through it. Granted, neither have I, but I can imagine it happening to many people, especially of developing countries.
@SomethingScanning Well, by that logic, you're also not in a position to assume the individual has more options because you likewise don't know the context of the situation.
On a semi-related note, arguments like yours have historically been used to delay decisions by drawing the conclusion that it is impossible to know for sure how to respond to a situation due to additional concurrent factors that complicate the scenario, often providing scant or misleading statistical evidence to suggest such factors are at play. This is an interesting argument because it appeals to one's sense of skepticism while also pretending to maintain a neutral stance.
@@dominusempyreus2383 There are fallacies from both points BUT the false dichotomy is beyond true. There are countless other ways to get food without stealing. Now you may find yourself in a situation where its steal or starve. But even then understanding right or wrong would lead a righteous person towards holding a sign to get money or food/ asking to do work for food/ asking for food/ NOT EATING (when i was homeless sleeping through it until the kitchen opened in the morning was always an option in my mind. The only point I'm making is that "stealing or starving" is a false dichotomy. Its never that simple.
there's this polish book called 'ferdydurke' by witold gombrowicz and the most famous scene is (paraphrased and simplified)):
"repreat after me kids - słowacki [a polish poet] was a great poet!" "but why was he a great poet? i don't feel that he was a great poet" "because.. he was a great poet" "but why?" "because he was a great poet" "but what makes him a great poet" "stop questioning me on this! think of my kids! why are you harming the kids?"
think it might be a bit topical here
POLSKA GUROM
I think the point of PragerU is best summed up by this:
“The modern conservative is engaged in one of man’s oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.
-John Kenneth Galbraith
I thought that's why they liked Any Rand so much?
Dudley Doleft's channel that could very well be the case.
key word: "modern"
Actual people that want to conserve aspects of society don't justify the very things our ancestors fought against.
And the modern Liberals as well.
For the life of me I cannot understand people who are so against stereotyping that it becomes their identity, only to turn around and unironically broadbrush a gigantic segment of the population.
As a former conservative Christian, I can tell you that the language of those videos fit very neatly into the Doctrine of those churches. It is imperative to them that God be the foundation of Values, because if there is Values without God then God cannot exist. God is the source of Good, and if values are subjective, then values can be whatever we want them to be. Value must be an unchanging rock centered on Goodness and what is the ultimate source of that goodness? God. They preach that there is no guarantee humans can come up with good values without divine intervention.
I'm not bringing this up to try to refute you, I'm just offering a window into how THEY think, because I used to think this way.
oh my god my dsylexic ADHD brain reading through this did not like it at all lol glad you got out of that type of thinking, it's confusing and flawed asf
Sounds good. Im agnostic but i dont see anything wrong with your statement.
That sounds like some creepy cult shit, ngl.
It's kinda almost the exact same thing they do when they're falsely generalizing & stereotyping atheists within their Christian Propaganda.
(i.e. "Atheists just *want* to sin!" & "Atheists are just mad/angry, or upset, at 'God'.")
All because they *Cannot* accept the reality that people actually exist who Genuinely Don't Believe in a "God".
Because if they accepted that then it would allow some minor doubts to creep in any time they even tried to understand an Atheist.
That was confusing as hell 😂 and I guess it makes total sense... If your values are coming from God himself. But I personally have only heard other humans telling me that God says this or that. Flawed, imperfect, mortal humans. I'm not just gonna take their word for it.
PragerU: Stop caring about things. Don't try to make the world better. Accept your lot in life. Shut up and blindly follow what authority figures tell you.
Unless it's owning the libtards!
Well its technically true.
No, make your life perfect. Then correct others. It goes like that
@@matan7899 How does one, "make their life perfect?"
Surely the quality of my own life in a large part depends on the quality of the world around me. And therefore, fixing the world around me, or "fixing others," would be the same thing.
Don't forget that the authority is also the source of all problems and that companies can do no wrong according to PragerU.
I hate the glorifying of the good ultra-wealthy people in capitalism that people do with Rockafeller and Bill gates. It's like hundreds of years ago people were probably glorifying good monarchs like "king so and so was such a good king, he gave money to the peasants and raised his children well so, therefore, the whole system of monarchy must be good because look at this one really good guy"
I mean, Gates operates in the IT branch. The salaries there are at least somewhat decent from what I've heard.
@@fluffynator6222 The outsourced salaries for the people they pay (or don't pay at all sometimes!) to actually make the phones, laptops, and other devices aren't decent, from what I've heard
@@bellacurtis6026
I didn't even know they make tech...
Just heard about Windows and Office.
@@fluffynator6222 supply and demand, you can't just take a rando and train them up to be a high level software developer in a year.
To be fair, Bill Gates does to a lot of charity work, so that's nice at least (even if it is for tax write-offs, I dunno if that's why he does it)
I live in southern colorado and my great great grandfather was a coal miner and as soon as Folsom started talking about how good Rockafeler was, I just thought to myself "wasn't he responsible for the Ludlow massacre?" So I am really glad you brought that up at the end as I don't think a lot of people know what happened.
Wow, I live in Denver and I was never taught this. I knew about the Colorado coal wars but never heard of Ludlow unless if its just a vague memory.
Wait Rockefeller was an oil tycoon, what did coal have to do with it?
@@ahmadsuleman9045 Rockefeller made money from more then just oil. He owned stock, land, housing, coal mines, oil, and some other stuff (not sure on all of those might be some I missed and other that I have wrong). While he is commonly known for oil that was not his only source of income.
@@joshb8440 ok, thanks for the info
Ahmad Suleman Rockefeller Jr.
I love the "don't try to fix the world" line, these people would have said the same thing to Jesus Christ. He did not have any qualifications or degrees, they would have told him to not complain and better himself.
Amazing.
So it's good to read the classics, but we can't think too much about them. Okay, Prager.
Oh they'll defend "the Classics" if someone's reading something not in the WeStErN cAnOn
Can't get over the irony of using an activist throwing a rock through someone's window as an example of "not blaming others for your problems".
Because, see, the person who seems most likely to "blame someone else for their problems" in that scenario is... the homeowner. Quite understandably so; he has a broken window because someone threw a rock through it. So how should he respond: Beat up the activist? Call the cops to do it? Demand compensation? Try to understand their motivation? Try to persuade them it was wrong? Join the protest? Call a politician to have the protest suppressed?
No, suggests Jordan Peterson, he should fix his own window and then work on the anger stirred up inside him by the incident. Now, arguably that's not a *bad* response - it would presumably be Jesus' response - but I'm faaar from convinced that it would genuinely be Jordan Peterson's response.
I mean, in his other videos he does argue in favor of the death penalty. (Jordan Peterson, not Jesus. Just for clarification...)
That's what happens when your reasoning is incredibly unbelievably vague
Shouldn't have lived in a neighbourhood that has activists /s
Ehh, don’t know if that’s the best example. In that case you’ve been directly targeted and wronged and know who did it. The Prager base is generally mad at social constructs they think directly target them but don’t.
Jordan Peterson would complain about the left if someone did that. Y'know, the leftist urge to break windows. /S
I love how the message I'm getting so far is "young people are ungrateful narcissists because they aren't grateful to us but that doesn't make us narcissists", while also saying "focus on yourself, not the world or your nonsense sjw politics", "wage imbalance isn't an issue because rich people are good people who deserve that much money", "all that matters are values/script/classics, so long as my religion/culture can take credit for it, and no, you can't question it or put critical thought into it whatsoever", "for all you people who have the 'right' values, go vote", "values are more important than money and happiness, so having good values will bring you money and happiness, boom, checkmate anticaps and evil ungrateful poor people"
Lioness ayn rand fanboys
Lioness beautiful
why cant jordan peterson just follow his own advice, focus on his own values and stop trying to influence the values of his fans?
Money
His fans with Daddy issues.
What "activism" is Peterson engaged in?
@@cockoffgewgle4993 spreading rightist extremist propaganda. holding speeches, giving interviews, spreading hate through very clear lies (like everything he said about bill c16, which is in no way what he claimed it is).
@@jurgnobs1308 Ah, so a bunch of abstract buzzwords. Gotcha.
Bill C16 compelled him to say things he didn't want to. Remember when lefties believed in free speech?
Rockefeller was a social Darwinist, and the richest man to ever live was a West African king, Mansa Musa (but of course PragerU would never tell you that)
West African Black *Muslim*
USS Glow Cloud Did you ever hear the Tragedy of Mansa Musa the Rich? I thought not, it’s not a story PragerU would tell you.
Actually that's literally impossible to say. First of all, that's 700 years ago. Secondly are we talking with inflation included, or just 1 to 1. Because I am pretty sure in a 1 to 1he's not. And even if it was inflated, I somehow doubt that. It'd be impossible to actually calculate inflations between the 1300s to 2019, income for his entire life based on that, and a bunch of other things. So even if it something you claimed, proving it would be nearly impossible. And because of that, he really can't be declared "richest man" because you can't accurate prove he is. And we CAN prove the wealth of people like Rockerfeller, Bill gates, and so on.
Neiasaurus Creations for one thousand... what’s a gold standard
@@Kenpachifreegod This thing that went out the window because of world wars? Specifically, the second world war.
I'm blown away with your patience in this video
Watch Big Joel's response video. Has a lot more substance.
@@AEFic this is the video!
My 7th grade social studies teacher basically worshipped the pragerU videos. We probably spent more time watching those videos than actually learning actual history.
You poor thing. I’m so sorry. 😐
my brother is the same. he treats them like the gospel
This is a one in a million thing, but his initials weren’t PT were they?
You are a thinker and a person who is profoundly and deeply informed; a critical thinker with the ability to ignore the weeds and focus on the trees towering over us. I intuitively felt that PragerU was just a mouthpiece for pure arch-conservatism. But you have been able to extract a higher order intent in all of their philosophical swill. I like that. Keep on thinking, kiddo. You are doing good things.
DAMN dude that's a hell of a way to close a video. This is some of your best work yet.
every time i see a fellow young human like you absolutely academically roasting boomers ,, my heart grows 3 sizes
My heart fucking explodes
Boomers are millions of people. Nice and not nice. Many helped end the war in Viet Nam and introduced movements against racism, against poverty, went to jail for human right etc. Some were Black Panthers and fought for women's rights.
I think people are mean the rulers the 1% that are so despotic and cruel.
Also, those that lie like Peterson etc. I am not a boomer by the way.
@@yourmother2739 that’s why he corrects those boomers who ARE harmful. Nobody is attacking vets for simply being vets.
Honestly, my biggest problem with PragerU is their obsession with urine and feces. Plus they ate my pizza rolls
They ate your pizza rolls. They've gone too far this time
@@xaviercolon9124 time to go John Wick and get them back.
?
i had a teacher in high school who showed us a few of these videos in class. we just laughed and made fun of what they were saying the whole time and he looked so annoyed lmao
Jesus man what a shitty educational system, these videos are the opposite of education, we actively laugh at this garbage in academia. Glad you guys see through this bullshit
the true educational legacy of Prager U: a cautionary tale
my guy over here just decimating my dad's facebook
Google 'decimate'. You might be a little surprised by what it really means and how it should be used.
@@oldbatwit5102 I remember my dad told me the definition of decimate when I was 7 lolll
@@oldbatwit5102 just googled it. It has two uses, but you either knew that and just an asshole, or you're not that smart and an asshole.
@@oldbatwit5102 shut the fuck up that's not how words work
@@oldbatwit5102 decimate has various definitions. To destroy a tenth of or to annihilate, depending on old or modern definitions.
i love how they call themselves pragerU so people are tricked into thinking they’re a legitimate academic source lmfao
I don't know why it's not illegal to refer to yourself as a "university" when you're not functioning as one.
@@sethoz22 it actually is! That's why they had to rebrand from Prager University to PragerU haha
They make it pretty clear at the bottom of every page on their website.
PRAGER UNIVERSITY IS NOT AN ACCREDITED ACADEMIC INSTITUTION AND DOES NOT OFFER CERTIFICATIONS OR DIPLOMAS. BUT IT IS A PLACE WHERE YOU ARE FREE TO LEARN.
Yeah, they do that because it's illegal to call yourself a university if you aren't. So they changed their name and put a notice at the bottom of their page where nobody will see it while tons of casual fans think they're a real academic institution.
saturn I love how shit for brain liberals think Jimmy Kimmel is a legitimate news source.
But fun fact: no
In fact the king of Mali, Mansa Musa, was the richest man in history. This is in part due to the unique mineral deposits in the deserts of mali and the unique trade community created by the spread of Islam.
He literally went around giving people free money.
You know you have too much money when you go around flaunting it.
@@rickrolld1367 That isn't particularly unexpected of royalty doing a pilgrimage in the history of the Muslim world. What *is*, however, impressive, is how his charitable donations during his pilgrimage were enough to severely destabilize and inflate the economies of the places he went through. My dude broke Egypt's economy because of how much gold he gave away to random people there lmao
@@henriquepacheco7473 such a lie.
@@yusufibrahim7916 What lie?
“Will this policy increase or decrease gratitude among people?”
To the republicans, banning things that don’t effect anyone but the people you’ve banned drastically reduces gratitude among people and doesn’t increase it at all.
I'm currently a student at prageru and I'm majored in Lib-owning degree. I know I won't get a good job after this. 😥
Well at least you didn't get a gender studies degree and end up at McDonald's ? 😂
@@Emppu_T. hey at least we actually go to college
@@benjaminheim735 that's enough of that yes
@@Emppu_T. never get a degree for any reason other than money basically. Philosophy is the stupid parsons degree, we can build society without thinking about it. We can understand complex topics like gender with common sense like people did in the past. I mean it's common sense that there is only one sex and gender men and women are just lesser men and not their own category. They are only vessals for babies to grow in and provide little to nothing to the child's nature.
Seriously this used to be how sex and gender was seen before it was actually studied. I suggest we actually study topics instead of dismissing them because they don't make money or because we think nothing new is worth while without having an even basic knowage of what the topic is. Considered how big a role sex and gender play in society (especially for conservitives) I suggest we actually look at at the history of it to get a better understanding of past ideas as well examine current ideas.
We do this wity economic models and other ideas so why is doing it for gender ridiculous? Oh wait you don't care. You don't know and you don't care to know.
@@Emppu_T. I bet you don't even know what jobs gender studies degrees can have.
PragerU's logic: "Clean up your room and stop worrying about the massacre of strikers! And be grateful you're not in the line of fire!"
That video's like something that'd be right at home coming from Stalinist commissars
I can imagine Prager U's response to the First They Came poem. "You didn't speak up when they came for the socialists? Good! Self improvement should be paramount. You can't change society anyway. Oh you said nothing when they came for the Jews and unions too? You're on the right track to true happiness!"
czdaniel1 wait til you hear about Stalin privatizing everything
+Macaroni&Cliche -- I think you're making a joke sort of nonsensical reference. But I'm going through my _Stalin History_ lists of:
*5-yr Plans,*
*Destruction of the Kolkhoz,*
and *10-million Starved&Murdered Ukrainians*
I don't see where the privatization reference....Oh, wait. I see it now!
Contrasting whatever evils of privatization against the evils of centralized State Planning! I see it now.
Still not funny, but I can see the point now
Stalin, Lenin, Wilson, Obama or Trump. Doesn't matter. Smash the state whoever's in it.
Mansa Musa has left the server
Mansa Musa owns the server.
Mansa Musa has inflated the servers currency.
Mansa Musa has now returned to conquer the server.
Mansa Musa has made all currency worthless
the server now serves Mansa Musa
I can’t believe i used to unironically watch these people. That’s a phase i’m so glad i moved passed. Now the only thing i watch involving them is videos like this and YTPs
Ayy same
Same
The message of Prager U:
- Don't study.
- Don't analyze.
- Don't organize.
- Don't partake.
- Don't care.
and above ALL else,
- DON'T QUESTION OR CHALLENGE THE POWERFUL.
It's only gender politics when women fight back, not when women are pushed down, that's normal.
It's only class warfare when the poor fight back, not when the poor are pushed down, that's normal.
And so on. It's essentially the foundation of conservative messages to people. "Don't fight back."
^"All conservatives are sexist, and none care about the poor."
Try stepping outside your bubble, aight?
No Im pretty sure their message is to work hard for oneself to be successful in life.
Richard Roberson No that's just a smoke screen for the real message of "Sit down, stop thinking, and shut up." There's absolutely NO reason to think you can't self improve while also working to make the world a better place. But that is an argument they try very hard to make. They're trying to use self improvement to rebrand, justify, and sell apathy.
Wheatboi
They've never made that argument. The real smokescreen is you.
The Jordan Peterson clip straight up sounds like something you would hear on repeat throughout a city in some dystopia future
"Inopportune questioning can confuse without enlightening" on a big bold font propaganda poster.
A future where Deranged Kermit rants at you through loudspeakers in the street...
Christian Dudley I knew it, Peterson is actually Wallace Breen
@@Graknorke So spot on
JP is actually a neo nazi, not even name calling.
“The British empire saw themselves as liberators” - PragerU
That’s like saying King Edward I saw himself as liberating the Scots.
Byleth of the Wild Being a massive history buff I’ve noticed this quite a bit
@@magicsteve5523 The Romans always held "lesser cultures" in contempt because of practices like ritual sacrifice. Ironically, it was one of the highest honors for a general to bring back prisoners of war and have them ritually killed to show Roman supremacy. It's not a new thing, it's easier to fashion yourself as a liberator or as fighting in self-defense (the Republican Romans, again, always justified their wars by claiming self-defense) than as conquerors, holding the moral high ground as a way to pretend that one's own culture/goals are holier than thou.
Some of them still do. We call them Tories.
@@vylbird8014 yeah how do they still win cos after the election everyone seems is pissed or is that a northern thing
@@duncanjackson6157 A lot of people are still trying to work out what happened in the last election. I'm attributing it to the Conservative party leadership's political abilities rather than their policies - they ran an effective, if underhanded, campaign based on exploiting public fatigue with the whole brexit mess, and they combined that with a strategy of dividing their opponents: By convincing the Brexit party to stand down in key constituencies, they were able to get close to 100% of the pro-brexit voters to vote Conservative, while the anti-Brexit voters were split between Labor, Lib-Dem, the SNP in Scotland, and a few lesser parties like the Greens - all of which ran on a 'brexit-lite' platform of negotiating a new but close trade partnership. They split the vote, and it worked.
When a fake university on ROBLOX, run by a bunch of TEENAGERS, teaches better than a team of grown adults, you know something's off.
Where can I find this Roblox university
1. Tell me where I can access this “Roblox university” lmao
2. Not only adults, supposedly QUALIFIED adults. Or maybe just old guys in suits? Kinda hard to tell the difference nowadays
@@chimp4225 Old people in suits, the highest authority. No, you don’t need to know what their history with academics, politics, and our funders are, let alone why they might be biased or entirely citing their own sources. Noooo, they’re tooootally valid educators. Pay no attention to the Kochs behind the curtain.
I want to attend roblox University
@@Broomful Probably high school roleplays, there are a bunch of those kinds of games on Roblox. There may be a college one somewhere.
Silly Dennis. What matters most in life isn’t morals. It’s to crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of their women!
Just watching you talk on the couch was a surprisingly amazing experience. You have a natural charm that comes out only when we're watching (and not just hearing) you for an extended amount of time. Great video; you're so insanely underrated and underwatched.
Trust me - big subs are coming for Big Joel
@@tastyloaf5487 I really hope so, because I
Saaaaaaaame. He deserves a much larger audience. His study of the Men Rights' Activists' documentary knocked me out on my ass.
And his beard is kinda cute.
@@grimtheghastly8878 *very cute
Imo.
Oh dang, I recently read Ron Chernow's biography of Rockefeller. The people who hold him up today as an exemplar of free-market capitalism should read it, too. Then they'd know that he said things like this:
“What a blessing it was that the idea of cooperation, with railroads, with telegraph lines, with steel companies, with oil companies, came in and prevailed, to take the place of this chaotic condition in which the virtuous academic Know-Nothings about business were doing what they construed to be God’s service in eating each other up.”
He wasn't just a monopolist out of self-interest; he thought monopolies were /good/. Far from valuing the competition of unregulated markets, he abhorred their chaos. The instability of the early dog-eat-dog days of the oil industry drove him to swallow up as much of it as he could so that he could calm it all down and make it predictable.
For what it's worth, it's true that Rockefeller had plenty of virtues. He was a man of good character in his personal life. He was very charitable, and not just for the sake of his image. He gave frequently, often in private, and before he was rich. And while he never hesitated to move against his enemies, he was never vindictive or sadistic. That said, he was self-righteous, ruthless, extremely anti-union, and completely incapable of self-criticism. And for all his talk about the wonders and public goodness of "cooperation", his anti-competitive dealings were always carried out with extreme secrecy.
Just goes to show how complex people can be...
Early chaos of oil was because it was so unregulated! The moment somebody tapped a new field, you created a Tragedy of the Commons, where everybody around that land knew that if they didn't drill as much as possible as fast as possible, then their neighbors would take all the oil. The unregulated drilling created massive regional surpluses where oil men became impverished because of how worthless the oil had become when they got it to market, then periods of oil drought where there was no oil to be found until the next field was discovered.
They way I see it (and I could be wrong), is that his ideas of monopoly, are not from malice towards the market for profit, but his views that competition becomes unnecessary cutthroat and anti-consumer, and that a monopoly (probably with the assumption it happens by good people) could work in unison to benefit the consumer, and deal with the problems of the industry. Part of It was his idea of regulation, as a regulation _by_ the market. I think.
@SomethingScanning That's kinda of what I was saying. I wouldn't doubt that he saw himself as a "benevolent dictator" of the market, even if he did want to help people.
Slave: I'm angry that master beat my wife and children to death!
Jordan Petersen: Quit complaining about others, focus on being a better slave for master, and you will find true happiness!
lobsters have hierarchy, check mate
Kind of all makes sense when you take into account that the Primary funding for PraigerU comes from the Koch Brothers.
I thought it was the Wilkes Brothers.
Pretty so brother* singular
shocklett crab raving intensifies
"I'm broke, my family disowned me, and I'm extremely depressed; BUT at least have good values :D"
omg THAT is literally the point of virtuous behavior. when you find yourself fucked in life that is truly all you have. holy fuck by this state of mind youll likely live and die without fulfillment as if any other aspect of life aside from a set of core values will help you in the long term. the irony of your thinking is honestly kinda sad
@@harrisp584 Dude... chill out.
@@theomegajuice8660 uhm where are we? TH-cam comments.... I will not chill out haha
I think you meant ":'D".
Harris P
You literally just explained why virtue is worthless.
Got a PragerU ad called "The Left Ruins Everything"
To be entirely fair, Adam Conover is on the left, so it's not entirely wrong.
Well my left finger of my left hand is fucked
@@brifox lol
Is that wrong?
I mean...Yeah they do.
So before I watched this video, I really thought Rockefeller was this pinical of morality and kindness, whenever my dad talks about him, he says he was the greatest man of the time. Well shit, I wonder what else I've been led to believe was great when it really wasn't.
A good channel I can recommend on topics like that is Shaun, my favorite of his is his British Rail video and his newer videos about the nukes and IQ are great as well, but very long.
Are you dumb? You didn't that was fishy?
Does anyone actually listen to Denis Prager? The very sound of his voice promotes the hardening of arteries.
Hello, conservatives aren't all hate mongers, hello!!!
What a fuckin clown Dennis really is!!!
Most of his videos sound like something from the Colbert Report, but serious. I wonder how much of this he actually believes, and how much he just says because he’s paid to.
Nobody except desperate and directionless young adults and Boomers.
@@VTRcomics Now listen here Jacob, values are what you consider to be more important than your feelings!
He sounds like the Bright Side guy
"No country in history has fought for the liberty of others as much as North Korea. Until Americans who celebrate Christmas acknowledge the evils I committed in MY youth, we will continue to live in a society." - Dennis Prager
Comrade Cora is the best!
@@sweatyslapfight7900 for reasons we do not fully understand
@@konitrix3166 I'm Ben Shapiro *suuuper genius.*
The N word.
Narcissism!
Noooooo 😩 don’t put an end to unrestricted capitalism you’re such a sexy economic system 😍😳
@Two Point Us i too get off on inequality and cruelty 😲😲❤️
Restricted Capitalism = 😣🤚🏿
Unrestricted Capitalism = 😌👉🏿
That communist pussy tho 😍😶😬😩
Was this is a Cody ko reference or did Cody ko steal this joke🤔 I'm referencing the dhar mann that's cringe video
Have you heard of something called the Economic Freedom Index? I would say unrestricted capitalism is pretty good.