Beep boop thanks so much for watching this video! I hope you liked it, and hopefully liked this lil series as a whole, and if you did and want to help support the channel, consider checking out my patreon! Here's the link: www.patreon.com/bigjoel. As I said at the end, I'm starting to stream these days! I've been playing a lot of Mario games, and if you want to follow that, boom, here's another link: www.twitch.tv/biggestjoel. Anyhow, stay safe out there! click on my beautiful links
@@nukiradio So what makes conservatives different? The fact that they victim blame while playing the victim? The fact that they lick the boots of the rich while playing the victim? And no, I'm not a liberal in case you're wondering.
Conservatives: traditional knowledge is best and we should listen to it over new interests Indigenous peoples: the knowledge of our nations, which predate the United States, say we should take care of the planet and not abuse its resources Conservatives: not like that
A nations progress is not determined by its ability to liberate the individual from all societal constraints. In fact that’s regressive. Foundations based off of religious principles, cultural practices, and a shared history are necessary to the advancement of a civilization. Without those fundamentals you will fall before you even start. Not saying that a nation has to be religious, I’m just saying those key fundamentals are what keep a society functioning. And yes they are religious fundamentals. But they don’t have to be.
@@anthonyhenriques7654 While simultaneously trying to convince us that sitting at church and listening to fantasy stories or letting some preacher tell us how "full of sin" we are is a good thing.
I have a master degree in philosophy and bringing up "common sense" in an argument during debates was always considered lazy. Common sense is really subjective and hard to define.
Bringing up common sense is last at best, but when certain right-wingers, typically the alt-right, use the phrase it's a euphemism for explicit racism or some other view that most people would find abhorrent. For instance, when UKIP leader Nigel Farage went on the radio in the UK and argued that no one would want to be neighbours with a group of Romanians because of common sense.
Common sense is not touching hot things on purpose because ouchie. Not whether or not a whole group of people deserve to be pressured harder by the law because of statistics, for example.
when people lean on "common sense" for their argument, i proceed under the asssumption that they have no idea what they're talking about. i can say anything is common sense, but common sense needs to be defined and proven.
What a glorious system - "Half of the world's prison population of about nine million is held in the US, China or Russia. Prison rates in the US are the world's highest, at 724 people per 100,000. In Russia the rate is 581." Great company you have there.
I wanted to say the same thing. This is such a weird video haha. PragerU making the same points as the “neo-marxists” like Adorno. They hurt themselves in their confusion. Such a ridiculous group of people.
I don't know if they do the same point. The PragerU's argument is more like "drop reason". The Adorno's argument is more in line with the concept of rationality of Max Weber, that involves four kind of rationality (instrumental, emotive, affective and value). Adorno say that Enlightenment focus only in instrumental rationality. The critique of Enlightenment in the Frankfurt School is much more complex and insteresting than PragerU. And yeah, is very worth to be critical about Enlightenment. Enlightenment is very in line with teleological thinking, esencialism, colonialism, capitalism and a lot of shity things.
"Conservatism is good because a lot of influential historical figures were conservatives." "Universal rationality is bad because Hitler used universal rationality, and he was bad." I swear to God, this is how a child argues about politics...
Conservative definition of skepticism: Outright rejection of an idea or way of thinking without any analysis or reason, just because it doesn't "feel" right.
DragonSheep Yep, that’s how they have demonized altruism so well; simply by calling it virtue signaling. I do wonder how successful it has been on the larger culture though, as there’s always the possibility that people against it are simply being louder, be it in volume or via repetition.
I literally laughed out loud when Tradition Man said we need to combat "dogmas" through adherance to tradition. Like, how can someone stare straight at their own cognitive dissonance like that for the entirety of the video making process without realizing it?
@@pielover267 - No, Tradition Blindly Adhered to is simply Tradition that is Blindly Adhered to. It is sloppy to Link Bad Thing with other Thing. Especially if bad Ting is not necessarily Bad. Its like saying Socialists like Free Health Care so all free Health Care Advocates are Socialists. Also, Conservatives do not believe in Blind Adherance to Tradition, and Proper Engagement with others Ideas would be a Good Idea.
@@skwills1629 I would love to hear why you think "blindly adhering to X," is different from "treating X as incontrovertibly true." Or is the problem that you're too much of a failure to know the definition of "dogma?"
PragerU: "Tradition is good. Like the traditional precedents set by Athens." Anyone: "But didn't the Athenians establish those precedents through reason?" PragerU: :| PragerU: >:|
I caught that as well with the additional twist that Jewish and Greek conservatives of that era were probably apoplectic at the prospect of foreign ideas mixing with their traditions. ;)
@@blasphimus Nononono, the Greeks considered it perfectly straight and not gay at all unless you were a bottom, which brings up the debate of the differentiation of the very definition of certain values and concepts we take for granted across cultures and times, which is another thing that conservatives don't want to acknowledge.
To be fair, we don't really follow Athenian traditions. We follow the traditions of a few specific people in Athens. Sadly, most of those people were idiots, and the actually *intelligent* people in Athens are roundly ignored. Like, for instance, Diogenes. Was he a funny meme man? Yes. Was he also a legitimately brilliant philosopher whose ideas have only become more relevant with the passing of time? Also, yes.
As someone who’s actually studied National Socialism, the racial science of the NAZIS crossed the line into abstract philosophy pretty often. They were starting with their conclusion, and looking for rational, scientific ways to justify that conclusion - this is, of course, not how science and reason work. Starting with a conclusion and trying to force reason and science to conform to it, is a practice far more common in conservative, religious group think, like that of PragerU.
They also had a huge hard-on for Germanic and Indo-Aryan mythology - which in itself wasn't the issue, the insane interpretetation was the issue. Zero scientific reason to be found here.
"They were starting with their conclusion, and looking for rational, scientific ways to justify that conclusion - this is, of course, not how science and reason work." Of course PragerU wouldn't be able to tell that kind of bad science from actual science: they think that method is perfectly fine and they do it all the time.
Edmund Spenser I can’t really think of any pseudoscientific beliefs that are inherent to or really have anything to do with progressive ideology. Could you enlighten me? Unless you’re about to say something transphobic, in which case you can piss right off.
Right wing propaganda is all astroturfed and help up by dark billionaire money. It’s a paper tiger. Left wing propaganda tends to have grassroots support.
PragerU invests thousands into its marketing and outreach, of course it's going to get more hits. It's like an indie film competing against a Hollywood blockbuster lol
Ally S Praguuu’s thesis: Here’s the reasoning and rational facts behind the libtards being bad and why we’re not bad, so do what we say. Praguuu: the worst people in the world have tried to justify bad things by claiming they have reason and rational for it to get people to do what they say, don’t trust it. Mmmmmmmmmmmkay.
@@sevenlikethenumber they were saying p much prager u: here's facts and reason prager u: people use facts and reason to justify bad ideas dont trust them
Calling environmentalism a "new idea" is a recent innovation in conservative orthodoxy, not something grounded in religious tradition. Totally agree with the crux of the video. A conservative's deepest desire is to just get his way without having to answer "Why?"
@@kipper1668 If you take the Garden of Eden as an allegory for the goodness of nature over technology, or even take the literal text of God's instructions to Adam, environmentalism can be traced to the very beginning of Abrahamic religions.
Proverbs 3:5 says “Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and lean not on your own understanding.” I had to memorize this and listen to many sermons saying not to think so much and have more ~faith~. They literally raise children to deliberately switch off their brains.
It's the same argument that creationists use: "Science gets things wrong! Thus, you must reject science!" Yeah, but the way we found out science was wrong was to use more science. The way we found out that people claiming to use "reason" weren't actually doing so was because we used more reason.
If only they actually cared about history. "We can learn a lot from ancient teachings." Hey, wanna learn about the technology held by people from Gobekli Tepe? What about the hunting techniques used by the Mohawk? Or the spirituality of people in Egypt? "No. Not like that."
luckjes112 haverkamp Dennis Prager is a young-earth creationist, so he probably doesn‘t even think Göbekli Tepe is a real place because it would contradict his beliefs.
Not to mention they say they love Ancient Greece but I'm pretty sure they're against homosexual relationships. And they say Athens is the pinnacle of reasoning, when it still participated in a pointless war with Sparta that weakened Greece as a whole and made it easier for the Romans to overthrow them.
PragerU: we put too much effort in the Enlightenment! Those ideas came from before then! Medieval Muslim Scholars and Scientists: 🙂 PragerU: not like that
In their weirdo fantasy land they're also using the "American language", they quantify using "American numbers and maths" and write using "American letters". They're delusional.
Ich seh's anders One giant difference that can completely separate us is our acknowledgement of biblical imperfection. I can’t speak for Christians but a majority that I’ve seen say that the bible is completely perfect as it’s written by god and has no flaws in it. Us Jews recognize that each book within the bible was written by a man which can open up the possibility of imperfections! Most books probably aren’t even our books because they draw big parallels to other ancient books, such as the story of Noah being similar to that of the Epic of Gilgamesh
@@issa3789 I Agree that most Christians (I've meet) view it that way but there were some who agreed that there a logical contradictions in the entire story from start to finish (to which they also blamed the imperfect nature) .... I was looking for differences in the Beliefe or maybe in the view on God (who he is, what hw wants etc)? Can you provide differences in that regard? Greetings
Ich seh's anders A giant belief would be the belief in a messiah. Christians view Jesus as the son of god, a messianic figure. I’ve heard some say that Jesus is actually god but Imm not sure if that’s accurate. We believe that the messiah hasn’t come yet and even then, our ideas of a messiah is different. I’m sure you know how the Christian messiah is seen as so I’ll just describe the Jewish messiah. We believe that the messiah is gonna be a human leader instead of a divine being sent to clean us of our sins. The messiah is going to lead us to a better future with stronger unity for the most part
@@issa3789 I think the Bible makes more sense that way, since a lot of the seeming contradictions in the Bible seem to actually be conflicts between the letter of the text and Churches' dogmas; for example, Abraham is described as a Chaldean of Ur, which would mean that the Mesopotamian cosmology in Genesis isn't stolen but rather rightfully inherited as Abraham would himself be a Mesopotamian who lived long before Moses and the Mosaic Laws and probably grew up worshipping the Anunnaki. Another example is textual conflicts between books written by opposing authors that are only contradictions if you're being told both were written by the same Author, God. It seems instead that the conflicting books were written by different authors with opposing views and included together to give the reader all sides so they can decide for themselves who's right.
Israel is Pro-Choice, has Universal Health Care and some of the more relaxed Marijuna Laws in the world. Remind this to Conservatives who are so gung-ho to defend Israel. Blows their minds!
By "American traditions" he means the traditions of indigenous people of America, surely. The ones that existed for thousands of years before the nation stated we now know as the United States was founded. That's why the PraegerU video links to Ojibwe lessons, right? Not gonna check, but I'm sure they're there.
And you would have fought on the side of the various warring native American tribes against the evil imperialist colonists during the settling of America right? If you were a settler - sorry, evil imperialist scum - in the mid 18th century in say, rural western New York or Pennsylvania, for example, you would have fled your home, family, county, and colony in order to help end western imperialism and fight with the peaceful Indigineous People™ to keep their land and traditions, is that correct? Which Indigenous People™s land do you occupy today white woman, and in what ways have you made amends to restore the lands you've stolen back to the ownership of the people of the tribes on whose land you now occupy? Or are you content just handing out links to Ojibwe lessons instead of making real progress?
@@betterat3751 I wouldn't say evil considering how the world worked then, but I would say terrible based on the fact that people should have empathy and maybe we could've annexed them without removing and wiping them out.
@@defox5019 Could've, would've, should've. This is just anachronistic moral superimposition and standard holding on an empire and subsequent fledgling nation that never gets applied to any other dynasty or empire in history. War is war and America isn't somehow uniquely terrible because we didn't peacefully annex everything west of the Hudson river valley and grant all the warring tribes citizenship. Not to mention there's no evidence any of those defeated tribes would have shown us the same anachronistic consideration. They would have done what everyone else did at the time, murder the problematic fighting age men, and subjugate the women, forcing them to convert to their religion and way of life. Which is exactly what happened to many colonial women and families during this time.
Well for me tradition is an identity for my nation, tradition is what keep us together with even with thousand island, and it's the thing that keep us move forward to modernization
Scotland even was quite the hotbed for Enlightenment thought in the 18th century, they're contradicting themselves lol. PragerU will never show the whole picture if they're talking history, only the fragments that could support the bullshit argument that ol' Dennis is trying to make.
Because "anglo-scottish" sounds even more "white" than "anglo-saxon" and Prager "U" will sneak white supremist ideas in wherever they can even if it means making up nonsense terms.
Ironically, he is referring to enlightenment philosophers who were influential in skeptic thinking, such as John Stuart Mill (English) and David Hume (Scottish).
Saying that hitler was rational, therefore we shouldn’t be rational has the same energy as Onision saying that talking causes genocide, so we shouldn’t talk Edit: thanks for the likes guys
@@XxThunderflamexX To people who don't understand human rationality, it does. It's the same sort of people who argue that morality comes from a god, so atheists shouldn't have a problem with Hitler since they have no objective standard of morality, except we do. It's called the veil of ignorance.
I think the reasons PragerU doesn’t state their conclusions/arguments outright are twofold. First, its a powerful tactic to allow someone to make the connections and thoughts within their own mind. Once its your brain drawing the conclusions you’re more likely to believe those conclusions, because they are yours. Second, it allows them some amount of plausible deniability. PragerU gets to act like someone is putting words in their mouth when one of their ideas is taken to a conclusion and argued against.
Not stating your conclusion outright is a practice common in politics because it gives people the ability to deny responsibility when their beliefs are taken to thenlogical extreme, so I’m not surprised that pragerU uses it in almost every video.
@@cobblegen1204 - But is PragerU worth the level of Condemnation it gets? By that I mean,is it Far Worse Really than others? Salon has said some Wonderfully Bizarre things over the Years for example, and I Read an Article by Phil Zuckerman where He conflates "Devout" and "Pius" with "Conservative Evangelical Christian", claiming Devout Churches are those who Believe all of what The Bible Says and do not Doubt, and views "Moderate" Churches are thus depicted as believing Less in their Religion,being More Secular, and having more Doubts, and thus being Less Devout. Then He equated Devoutly Religious with specific Political Views, and claimed "The Most Devout" Christians were less Moral than Secular People, because they disagree with Him Politically on Gun Control, Immigration, and Abortion. He also said the most Devout Christians are those who Least Believe n Science citing Climate Change. So, if You are not an Evangelical Protestant, You must not be Devout. And if You are Devout, You vote Republican. He also said The Catholic Church ran the Moat Extensive Paedophile Ring in Human History which is just Ridiculous.
@@BazzBrother - Saying Whjataboutism is getting Dull. Why not accuse Me of projection too, and say I am the perfect example of Dunning-Krueger. It is not Whataboutism to Show how You have Unjustified Double Standards in how You assess materials. Though Ironically accusing People of Whataboutism is a way for you to Dodge their Questions. I didn't Dodge Anything, since I asked the Question. And its not a False Equivolence. Prager U is more Accurate than Sources you'd see No problem with.
The American Revolution was definitely a conservative idea... Definitely nothing enlightening or liberal about rising up against a long standing monarchy
Sawyer Northrop “Smaller government.” What does that even mean? A less centralized government is inherently liberal. “Small government” is a meme to be applied selectively wherever American conservatives want to weaken a public program.
@@Zarastro54 like, the whole reason the constitution was created, was because the more decentralized option (ie The Articles of Confederation) wasn’t working.
I literally had a uni lecture about the Enlightenment last week; the way that Pinker approaches the topic is the complete opposite of anything resembling sound historical study. What a doofus.
"These ideas [socialism, feminism, environmentalism] deserve to be met with some *good old-fashioned Anglo-Scottish skepticism*"... What a truly gross phrase.
@@skwills1629 Except, they're objectively not shared? Using just the US as a pretense, every state alone has different traditions. The indigenous tribes (from the surplus of north american tribes, inuit, and Hawaiian indigenous people) here before the European settlers had wildly different traditions. You can not possibly enforce every single one of those at once, it's physically impossible, from the sheer number alone as well as the fact these traditions contradict each other regularly. This doesn't even include the over 100 countries all around the world with equally as diverse ideas of traditional. What conservatives often mean by traditional is 1950's American dream. Women being home makes, men being bread winners, ultra capitalism, not a trace of LGBTQ visibility, and so on. Just watching Prager U's other videos on gay people, marriage, and general social stances as a whole prove this
I'd really wish that the far left and right weren't more vocal than the somewhat more neutral left and right, it really just makes divides in us when we think the other side is absolutely insane.
I've long since realised that "common sense" really is a made up phrase (and not in the sense that all words are made up). "Common sense" is invoked when people purport to be all about sensible and practical thinking, but all they're really saying is "this thing is obvious to me and therefore it should be obvious to you" and I'm like... No. Just because you see something a certain way does not mean that I should also see it that way. Those two words don't magically change that. Make an actual argument rather than hiding behind them.
I personally noticed this when I read a couple manga where the emotional conflict or the punchline to a joke is “well that doesn’t follow common sense” but I’m not Japanese so neither the common sense or the uncommon sense belong to me 😂
I like how they mention their ideals are founded on ancient Greek philosophy but gloss over that the ancient Greeks were A-okay with homosexuality Edit: Spelling
Sadly, though, Ancient Greece was mostly only okay with male homosexuality, not gay women. So in that respect, they were more progressive that the Victorians, but less progressive than 21st century America. If PragerU really wanted to emulate Ancient Greece, they would still be quite bad.
Alexander Will The point was that they actually don’t, though, because they’re only taking the parts they agree with while ignoring every other belief. That’s not quite how it works. You can find ideas you agree with in practically any doctrine or ideology if you look hard enough, but you can’t just choose a few things you already fundamentally agreed with and say that you have adopted *all* of that entity’s ideals for the sake of making your argument look better.
@@manospondylus man when i was researching that it was so surreal. i mean for one they did actually call it pederasty, i had always assumed that was a name we had retroactively applied from the future, yk? but nope. and second, a bunch of writings from back then are almost identical to some things certain gay guys will still say today about how vaginas are gross and smelly. i was like, what am i even reading again? this was meant to be a great philosopher? and then the thing i read started going off into "now, lubed up boy thighs - THAT'S where it's at" and i was like. ok i'm done and closed the tab lol
Science isn't bad, _Hitler's_ science was bad. I also love how their little graphic for feminism is just like, 3 women. Like, "Uh oh, watch out everybody, it's *~tHe WoMeN.~"*
Hitler didn't do science, he did pseudo-science. Back then it was way easier to popularize some idea as being scientific because the general public didn't knew much about how science was supposed to work
Shadow Skull You’re ridiculous. PragerU will always need debunking. Every day in the US, around the world, young men and women are introduced to this type of ideology. Content like Joel’s are a necessity.
Shadow Skull Ah, yes. I see your point. Edit: but aren’t we doing that? If you are like me, a socdem lefty in the US, we are in the midst of combatting right wing ideology and moving our aims to actual legislative change like affordable housing and M4A. Leaders like AOC and Ro Khanna.
I assume when they say Ancient Greece and Jerusalem they ignore all the bisexuality, polyamory and helping the poor and teachings about how the rich should give away all their money...
Also i feel like conservatives whouldnt take a liking to hedonism, Diogenes or cynicism, especially în its old sense (fuck soceity, lets live. like dogs)
@@bezerker2173 Ah lets not forget other things Diogenes did: Urinating on wealthy Athenians that disrespectfuly threw bones at him on the note of rich people His quote "in a rich man’s house there is no place to spit but his face." Masturbating in public Overall just hedonism and not caring what soceity says and doing whatever floats your boat I mean he wasnt your avarage ancient greek person but he was admired by many , notably stoicists which he directly influenced
"Ah, tradition, otherwise known as peer pressure from dead people!" Edit; I do believe in maintaining traditional practises in religions, cultures etc especially ones historically erased by the white man, I want to be very clear in the fact that I do find value in and support the preservation of cultural heritage + traditions in the modern world. That said, my comment is being made as a white person in the western world facing family and societal peer pressure+expectations that I refuse to participate in due to them not suiting my lifestyle + choices. I personally believe some traditions need to be stopped for medical reasons (female genital mutilation, circumcision, piercing ears of a child under age 5 etc due to medical complications, lack of consent, etc) but that the majority of traditions enrich peoples lives + give them a connection to their ancestors which should not be discounted or abandoned.
@@Stormvermin-bx1lh Cause morals and sociology that have stagnated for centuries won't get us any farther. To elaborate on your reductive metaphor, you can't fly to the moon on a wheelcart
"Anglo-Scottish"? "Judeo-Christian" (represented by Jerusalem and Athens somehow) I just love how the case for tradition involves bunching together two "traditions" that traditionally were violently incompatible.
@@iseemtobelost8265 I suspect it's another subtle way to dupe people. By using a less generic and mainstream term (and one with a dash!) they give lesser informed viewers who don't know any better the impression of being more sophisticated and educated. Using such a term must mean that this stuff has been properly and professionally studied and not just pulled out of their ass, right?
@@siukong Or they really don't want to come out and say the truth (as per Limey's addition). My guess is that this particular traditionalist was referring to some philosophers who happen to be English and some who happen to be Scottish. Considering the image at 12:34 includes John Selden (English and Misspelled), David Hume (Scottish), Adam Smith (Scottish) and Edmund Burke (Irish catholic, who held positions in England and Scotland), it seems likely.
The whole alt-right pill thing is highly ironic because The Matrix was written by two transwomen and was written as an allegory for being trans. The pill colors even reflect early hrt.
@@gliscorpropagandaaccount1764 it's quite sad how the great concept of taking the red pill has been completely twisted by incels who unironically believe that men are worldwide more oppressed than women.
@@squirrel1331 the red pill was one of the terms for HRT at the time the movie came out. It was less a metaphor the movie was built on and more symbolism that they snuck in.
And how there are still no physical barriers to their way of life? Well, I guess there is, if you consider harassment and persecution a part of your way of life
Anytime a conservative comedian faces a little backlash from teenagers on Twitter for being bigoted they whine that they're being silenced/cancelled/having their first amendment rights attacked, and they always do it *during* a set they're performing in front of a massive crowd of adoring fans, and there's never any significant negative effect on their career. They're literally insane, I'm sure of it.
@@thevulpinecollective in fact they do even better when they have controversy, and that’s the biggest cosmic joke. All this discourse over censorship and so many of these people have never done better financially or had more of a very devoted built in audience. Some people will like things solely because there is some kind of fake controversy
Conservatives see any disagreement with their perspective as "being silenced" bc under their authoritarian mindset; only complete unquestioning obeying is accepted
It legit fascinates me how arbitrary conservative adherence to "tradition" is. They're not primitivists, they obviously believe *some* progress has been acceptable, but they just draw lines in the sand on a whim, purely to fit their own agendas. Like "okay, that's *enough* logic and progress thanks". Boggles my mind how shaky and random the foundations of their ideology are.
That's the reason why I've always been kinda skeptical on conservatism, especially the "reject modernity, embrace tradition" style. They seem to have no problem with any kind of technological and scientifical advance, unless it's about gender, race, evolution, climate change or technological stuff such as microchips and 5G
@@marcello7781 Because tradition is just a scapegoat for the authoritarianism that characterises the Authoritarian Right (Conservative) but they need a scapegoat as they want to pretend to be Classical Libertarian which is the Libertarian Right ie the social polar opposite so they need a narrative to mask the authoritarianism to prop up their curtailment of bodily autonomy like drug and abortion laws amongst others.
The lines they draw are no whims, but a calculated manipulation to garner votes. Every single position they hold, there's a collective conservative think tank baking of any particular issue that isn't partisan, so that when it comes out of their witch's oven, it becomes partisan. Abortion is an issue meant to appeal to religions' stance on birth control in general, and they do as much as they can to obfuscate knowledge so people who might change their stance don't know why prenatal care is bad or why women who had miscarriages needed a late term abortion. Police brutality means the police are always justified in their use of force, victims are attacked postmortem, and violent murderers eager to be violent can call themselves heroes so long as they have a badge and no video evidence to the contrary exists. They do this in such a way so that any particular issue is entwined with every other issue in a set of values that you must adhere to, or else you're against God, you're against families, you're against law and order, you're against unfettered access to guns that you need because minorities are out to get you. Oppose the liberals who want free stuff paid by your taxes, the extinction of heterosexual couples, socialism that is exactly the same as the corrupt system of Soviet communism, violent criminals to go free and unpunished, just oppose everything that sounds bad as we describe it, just don't look into why people have beliefs, don't look into facts, don't have critical thinking, just be obedient because we are God's children and we know best (snorts a line of cocaine). And they've created a sheep army that are all Meghan McCain who think they're right if they just talk the loudest. The scariest thing is that it works. They get their votes. Anti-intellectualism invents "wealthy coastal elites" as an all-encompassing bogeyman as an answer to any and all education on any given topic. And now, they can make up lies and conspiracy theories to fuel the paranoia of their most vulnerable gaslit base. People who call Obama a Nazi, but agree that Nazis are very fine people. People who simultaneously insist the Civil War was a "war of Northern aggression" started by a tyrant president, yet a president that was Republican who was more inline with modern conservative values, a war that was fought over states' rights and not slavery, Confederate leaders must have statues honoring them because it's erasing history to take down the statues and it's not erasing history to pretend traitorous slave mongers don't have numerous documents and records of their racism and motivations. Sorry for the rant, but Jesus Christ, how has it gotten so bad?
The constant is the maintenance of hierarchy. That's it. That's the foundation. Currently the capitalists are at the top of the hierarchy so that shaped what progress is acceptable.
After spending my whole life, up until my mid-20s, indoctrinated in this type of thinking, it was absolutely *_mind blowing_* to realize that, *yes,* thinking progressively is _OKAY._ It even made *more* sense than the bullshit "Judeo-Christian-Anglo-Scottish" values I had been subjected to. When you live in a moral vacuum, you have no *idea* that there are thoughts and values *outside* of those being force-fed to you.
I do love my ancestors of Scottish descent on both sides of my family because they were a bunch of farmers on one side who were constantly caring for their land and living off it well, and a bunch of preachers on the other side who were acting against Nazis. At least that was my great-grandparents.
It's so funny how they use "statistical evidence" to back their arguments in an effort to appeal to rationality and "cold hard facts" and then make a video about how rationality is bad
I love how he cherry-picked with examples of Hitler and Marx (who being put side by side make me laugh) as how science leads to bad people doing bad things. Yet he never talks about how religion has lead to wars. Or how conservative thinking has been used to suppress popular revolts. Glad Hank is leading the good fight Edit for spelling error.
Religion wasn’t the problem, the problem were the people at the top who wanted money which has nothing to do with religion because greedy people exist everywhere even in non-religious places.
@@planelattice2783 True, there are greedy people in the absence of religion. Religion however does serve as an overwhelmingly powerful force through which greedy people can exploit others. Adherents will willingly follow an exploiter to escape eternal damnation and social ostracization. Without religion someone could still exploit others through ostracization. However without religion someone cannot be exploited for fear of eternal, "worse than you can possibly imagine" torture. And many people will do whatever it takes financially to escape those fiery pits and those scary, pitchfork wielding demons.
He did not Argue "Science makes People do bad things". Conservatives are not Anti-Science. Also, the Conflict between Religion and Science doesn't Exist. Its not like You must choose to either believe in Religion or believe in Science. Religion has also never lead to Wars. Even the Wars Of Religion in Early Modern Europe were over more than just this Thing called Religion. Also, Conservative Thinking is often whatever a Liberal disagrees with even if it is Historically liberal. Like viewing all Race based Policies as "Conservative" when many were advocated by Liberals of their Era, and opposed by Conservatives.
We live in a world of weasel words where it depends on your definition of "Conservatism" and "progress". One of the major selling points of Conservatism these days is the idea that they will conserve progress while Progressives will lose what progress we've made, gambling it away by trying to make any more progress.
@@semi-mojo I mean... conservatism started out as a movement against the French Revolution that wanted to preserve the aristocracy because they believed poor people shouldn't rule themselves. This is literally what Edmund Burke, the guy who conservatives today point to as the father of conservatism, wanted. Burke had spent his life getting close to the aristocracy and had garnered so much power within the system... that he didn't want it to go away when the French Revolution started because the French people were sick of being ruled by the rich. Burke disagreed that the poor should have any power in the government. He believed that the poor needed to be ruled by an aristocracy. But he realized they couldn't go back to noble families and kings... so he decided the best way to determine who should be the rulers was to let the rich rule over everyone... because somehow that means they were most fit to rule. Burke wanted the rich... to govern... because then the rich could maintain their power... aka a modern aristocracy. So that's what conservatism is based on... not wanting to go to a true system of Democracy where the common civilian actually has power. So I would say that modern conservatism was born out of resistance to progress and that's all it ever was. It never advocated for progress.
Here's a fun tradition: all the major cities spending tons of taxpayer money to build sewers at the end of the 19th century. So much less dysentery, huge economic growth for using taxpayer money to improve the health of the population.
I hate, ABSOLUTE HATE, the term "common sense". Common sense, what, like sight, hearing, touch, taste, smell? Those are common senses. Knowing fire is hot is common sense. Political science is NOT common sense.
Common sense can be helpful in certain circumstances, as it is essentially the brain’s shortcut. Common sense says don’t run out into the middle of a busy freeway. But this mental intuition only works for the most basic of ideas and can lead us to incorrect conclusions when something requires more complex and abstract thought. Common sense says if you drop a bowling ball and a penny from a height, the bowling ball should fall faster.
You can't make a lightbulb or put a computer together using 'common sense', let alone handle the intricacies of an entire society. To say otherwise is to claim that everything is straightforward and nothing can be counterintuitive.
@K. B.L There is a slight difference between common sense and sense (which is synonymous with reason). Common sense is a term that can be thrown around by people that disagree and want to argue that their own beliefs are just common sense while anyone that disagrees with them must be unreasonable or stupid. Common sense can also be synonymous with 'sense' in certain contexts. But in this video, they made it clear that they're not using 'common sense' to mean reason, rationality, logic, skepticism or all those other thought intensive words they seem to hold in disdain and fear. Their argument is that we should replace careful, logical thought with our gut feeling or intuition, which they call 'common sense'. They don't call it what it is; gut feeling or intuition, because then the flaws in their reasoning would become obvious; it's clear that intuition is insufficient for anything with enough nuance or complication to grasp intuitively, we can not even build a toaster using our gut feeling, let alone fix complicated societal issues, and people can have immoral gut feelings- for example that it's 'just wrong' for people of different races to get married or for a married woman to have a job; so they use common sense as a euphemism to skirt around this, since common sense *often* means reason, something we can all get behind (just not here). It's a very anti intellectualist argument to say the least.
You know, the infuriating part is that the premise of re-examining the enlightenment is a really interesting one. Philosophy Tube has a really interesting video about african philosophy in which it shows how an Ethiopian philosopher puts forward similar ideas to Descartes. Some medieval nun schools produced ideas similar to Protestantism way before Luther. The political ideas of the Enlightenment can be traced back through history to many different contributors. But then again, it is PragerU, and they fly of the handle really quickly.
It's almost a pretty _honest_ moment from them, to go right for "don't think, thinking is bad, just do what is _traditional"_ It's also worth noting that I don't think Prageru ever actually makes an argument for anything. They set one up, the start heading in the general direction of an argument, and then they sort of veer away, relying mostly on implications to lead a viewer towards assumptions. They don't really do anything particularly well, but they put just enough effort into this cowardly approach to persuasion to be able to catch naive people (and in my estimation there are a good number of naive people out there, especially in America) and at the same time not having any concrete point makes it more difficult to persuasively debunk them. I mean, if I wasn't a person who just immediately saw through their BS, would I be as willing to listen to cogent counterpoints right after I've been coaxed into close-mindedly only following "tradition"? And of course by tradition, those of us on the left know they mean the right-wing corruption of Christianity, American-Conservative politics, and (let's just whisper this part) FASCISM. All set to a sanitized aesthetic and a vaguely 1950s-fantasy worldview that conservative types romanticize. Prageru is really a quite dangerous propaganda company. They're _preaching_ for the abandonment of reason in favor of a dark-ages style society. The latter bit they haven't quite taken off the mask for, yet, but it's pretty clear to me that that is what they're gesturing towards. A time of great oppression and corruption and misery... but when a select few were immensely powerful.
I don't really like punching right, but yea PragerU is pretty bad, they just aren't very rigorous. I mean the graphs without labeled axis are just hilarious imo
I can't get over his apparent assertion that Conservatism pre-dated the Enlightenment. What exactly does he think they were trying to conserve? Also most modern Conservatives generally don't intentionally promote thier politics as a synonym for Feudalism. It's not a good look.
Right, that was my point. Conservatism was created as a reaction to the enlightenment. It doesn't make any sense of "conserve" something if that thing hasn't gone away yet.
It’s funny, I’ve seen them saying the exact same thing about liberals. They love to use the phrase “listen and believe” to attack leftist views and imply that conservatism is inherently more rational. Fuckin’s strange time to be alive.
It's not really though. Maybe from the outside it can look like that, but just because someone doesn't arrive at the same philosophy or conclusion as you doesn't mean they don't think and just mindlessly swallow what they're fed.
@@krombopulos_michael when they actually make an argument that has any substance to it _at all_ - then I'll take them seriously as ideological opponents. When all they've got is the offerings of PragerU and such-like intellectual power-houses, there really isn't much to work with.
The National Health Service is a part of my English history and tradition. Tradition is inherently morally worthy. Therefore nationalise every healthcare system.
The values of the True Leveller Diggers are far more traditional than these fascist fucks. Therefore we must hold all our property in common and establish a Christian anarchist utopia.
The entire video is just the intellectual version of " You drink water? So did Hitler!" " You like animals? So did Hitler!" You like rationality and science? So did Hitler!
My probelm with tradition takes the form of a simple scenario. Imagine a society in which every individual prioritizes tradtion, it has always emphasized tradition and will always emphasize tradition. Now, how would this society have progressed to discover fire, invent the wheel, make the first computer, agree upon a language? When you value tradition above all else, scientific progress, racial equality, mathematic achievment, and quality of life, will remain stagnant if not degrade.
I personally think PragerU dances so closely around conclusions without explicitly saying them to instill those conclusions into people in a way that they think they came up with it themselves. Essentially the viewers would think “this conclusion makes sense given what i have seen... it must be the way the world works and i will be more defensive about it because it’s MY idea”
"most of the progress we've made comes from conservative traditions openly skeptical of human reason" i've never been more puzzled by a statement before, now that's a sentence that doesn't make any sense
Despite the recent increase in anti-intellectualism and ass-backwards traditionalism in America, it gives me a little hope knowing that despite the efforts of hardcore Conservatives, human culture (in general) tends to get more open-minded and progressive as time goes on. It's just straight-up unproductive and impractical to keep everything exactly the same forever, with that line of thinking we'd all still be cavemen.
That's a pretty linear vision of human history... "Progress" is a not easy to define. Some past cultures were more open minded, some were less open minded. Some places today are not open minded, some are. I think the myth of human progress tend to support way too much capitalism and ecological neglect, i think we should be skeptical about it (even the Marxist vision of a world progressing toward communism).
Is it just me or is a lot of what they say extremely dangerous. I mean talking about eliminating people's free will to make their own decisions just because of tradition is something out of a horror movie. For people that supposably love America and what makes Americans free, they sure do have a lot of ideas and policies that really restrict freedom.
If I were Yoram Hazoney, I would probably return my PhD in Political Philosophy out of sheer embarassment after getting this thoroughly rinsed by some dude on youtube.
"Most of the progress we've made comes from conservative traditions openly skeptical of human reason." But... aren't traditions inherently opposed to progress? Like, progress is "I don't like the way things are, let's change it" and tradition is "I like the way things are, let's not change it". Even without getting into whether tradition or progress is good, or any other outside point, Prager's statement is a fallacy in and of itself.
As one person commented in your first Prager U video ever: _"If you drew a graph of the people mad at the French Revolution and the people of Prager U, you would get a perfect circle."_
"Common Sense" translates to "what I know" which translates to "what everyone with any sense knows." It's a substitute for education; more than that, it's a substitute for knowledge.
I can't believe anyone falls for the propoganda channel that is Prager U, but the sheer amount of young conservatives shows it's working. "Reasoning is bad, don't think. Just embrace tradition."
Could say the same thing with young marxists, so many of them indoctrinated by youtubers, teachers etc. I would say marxism is ironically a religion, they go that a big company CEO had to "exploit" his workers, even if you prove otherwise that the ceo infact did no exploitation. Most of these young marxists dont even understand the basics of economics, if they did they would stop saying that the CEO is exploiting. It is really sad to see these examples of just following stuff some guy/news network spewed on the internet, this goes for all sides, well what can you do, just hope they grow out of it and come to more reasonable points.
And from my experience these young conservatives and marxists(have seen more marxists show this behavior, but the conservatives are still a ton) are super arrogant and think how smart and better than everybody because they believe in their ideology.
@@user-nb5uw5ui9i google marxism. I dont think you know what political affiliations are. I think you're trying to say socialists? probably anarcho-libertarians, of which have very little representation if their elected officials are anything to indicate
"Logic and reason sucks. Follow tradition instead because it is good!" "And what methods did you use to measure and analyze this tradition with? How did people reach the conclusion that these traditions are good?" "We used... faith! Yes, we used faith and faith is good!" "Alright. How did you measure that then?" "Our belief demonstrates with good reasoning and logic that-- aw crud."
i spent a summer as a counselor in training at a summer camp that had been around for almost a hundred years. their position on tradition was that it was a great way to connect with the past, but any tradition that nobody enjoyed wasn't worth being kept around. the happiness and experience of the campers was more important than tradition - current happiness was more important than preserving the past
I sometimes imagine Dennis Prager and various speakers from pragerU in general, just, like... sitting down and watching a movie like The VVitch, because I think they'd just be nodding their heads at the doctrines/beliefs of the puritanical society and being like "see, that IS where the family went wrong -- their society had the right idea, throwing them out! This is truly a Cautionary Tale for the young women of Today." Essentially, if the ppl involved in pragerU had their way, they'd end up constructing a romanticized/modern version of what the puritans had. old-timey Salem but with Big Oil. You can marry off your young daughter to a fellow rich old white man AND make another billion dollars off your pipeline construction, ALL in the same day! ...Yikes.
Cons love to play out that N@zis had "socialist" in their name. They feel they can get a lot of traction out if that. But even back when I was a young propagandized con myself, even I could tell the difference between the two.
"I don't think people are willing to just quietly accept that the world they are given is the one they should have" is just common sense. There is a delicious irony to that.
The hatred of the Enlightenment doesn't even make much sense, as many Enlightenment figures WERE religious and would be considered Conservative when put next to modern values.
I think a lot of Conservatives like the Enlightenment and see themselves as conserving it from Progressives, who they believe will lose what progress we've made trying to get any more progress, look up Glenn Beck.
interesting that he would mention how enlightenment individuals were conservative, *when conservatism was founded in reaction to enlightmentment's ideals of democracy and fairness, seeing it as threat to the established social hierarchy* . i am simplifying of course but that's the general gist of it. it was literally created *because nobels disliked the enlightenment and social reforms* and here he is hundreds of years later claiming credit for it in true conservative fashion.
Growing up hearing my parents always listen to Rush Limbaugh, I heard the phrase "common sense" used a lot in places I didn't think it should. I came to the conclusion that it's just a way to avoid actually explaining anything.
@@KlericYT great! I've used two of your glitches in one of my (Wii-U) runs. Though without motion controls on the switch pro-controllers I've stopped playing.
Beep boop thanks so much for watching this video! I hope you liked it, and hopefully liked this lil series as a whole, and if you did and want to help support the channel, consider checking out my patreon! Here's the link: www.patreon.com/bigjoel.
As I said at the end, I'm starting to stream these days! I've been playing a lot of Mario games, and if you want to follow that, boom, here's another link: www.twitch.tv/biggestjoel. Anyhow, stay safe out there! click on my beautiful links
heyyyyy
I miss your hair already
Thanks for the great videos, Joel! :D
Big Joel just turned into Luigi
Loved this series and is love to see similar stuff in the future.
I like how they took credit for common sense as if not touching a hot stove is an exclusively conservative viewpoint.
Liberals love burning their hands, obviously! How else will they be victims
🧐
@@nukiradio That wasn't the point though, was it?
@@nukiradio So what makes conservatives different? The fact that they victim blame while playing the victim? The fact that they lick the boots of the rich while playing the victim? And no, I'm not a liberal in case you're wondering.
@@rendomstranger8698 dude was clearly joking
@@perhaps1094 You can leave out the word "clearly". I've seen much more insane conservatives who weren't joking.
Conservatives: traditional knowledge is best and we should listen to it over new interests
Indigenous peoples: the knowledge of our nations, which predate the United States, say we should take care of the planet and not abuse its resources
Conservatives: not like that
PragerU can't hear this because they plugged their ears with oil
Oh yeah, they are for "traditional values" of capitalism... which have existed only for 4 centuries, but nevermind
@The Icon of Sin I can't tell if they're that low effort or they know their audience is too dumb to notice
@Hans Hanzo Based as all f*ck!
@@KateeAngel the capitalism we have do day has only existed since about the 17th century
"Most of the progress we've made has come from conservative traditions."
Yeah, that's not how words work.
I had to pause the video to process that phrase...
words don't exist it's all meaningless just shut up and consume PragerU
Duh, TH-cam was invented by God! This is common sense, people!
Conversely, most of the traditions we’ve made came from conservative progress.
A nations progress is not determined by its ability to liberate the individual from all societal constraints. In fact that’s regressive. Foundations based off of religious principles, cultural practices, and a shared history are necessary to the advancement of a civilization. Without those fundamentals you will fall before you even start. Not saying that a nation has to be religious, I’m just saying those key fundamentals are what keep a society functioning. And yes they are religious fundamentals. But they don’t have to be.
Married men work more, go to bars less, and church more, PragurU is convincing me not to get married
😂😂👍🏻
They certainly live in a fantasy world.
it's amazing how they try to make going to a bar seem like something that's not even fun to do
Shqipe
@@anthonyhenriques7654 While simultaneously trying to convince us that sitting at church and listening to fantasy stories or letting some preacher tell us how "full of sin" we are is a good thing.
Isn’t it weird how PragerU refers to huge historical events in terms of individuals, rather than as parts of a system
"Great Man History"
well there is no society, really. just individuals.
- some white lady
@@yunikage we DON'T live in a society
@@yunikage ye, it's no surprise they love to suck off Margaret Thatcher.
@@GotPotatoes24 joker v karen
I have a master degree in philosophy and bringing up "common sense" in an argument during debates was always considered lazy. Common sense is really subjective and hard to define.
Bringing up common sense is last at best, but when certain right-wingers, typically the alt-right, use the phrase it's a euphemism for explicit racism or some other view that most people would find abhorrent. For instance, when UKIP leader Nigel Farage went on the radio in the UK and argued that no one would want to be neighbours with a group of Romanians because of common sense.
Common sense is not touching hot things on purpose because ouchie. Not whether or not a whole group of people deserve to be pressured harder by the law because of statistics, for example.
these morons think divine command theory is logical and you're surprised they're citing common sense?
Thank you
when people lean on "common sense" for their argument, i proceed under the asssumption that they have no idea what they're talking about. i can say anything is common sense, but common sense needs to be defined and proven.
"[The American] Justice system is good as hell."
Yes. It is like Hell.
What a glorious system - "Half of the world's prison population of about nine million is held in the US, China or Russia. Prison rates in the US are the world's highest, at 724 people per 100,000. In Russia the rate is 581." Great company you have there.
@@devote I recently wrote about how Australia's numbers getting to about 200/100k was problematic. Damn, America is not very "free"
I think Hell would be better; Hell has a hotel.
@@joeblaster8770 At the very least, we have a kitchen run by Gordon Ramsay in hell
@@龍夫武田耕-q2k That to.
I find it funny that the Frankfurt School also offer a critique of Enlightenment, but i doubt anyone at PragerU would ever read it
I wanted to say the same thing. This is such a weird video haha. PragerU making the same points as the “neo-marxists” like Adorno.
They hurt themselves in their confusion. Such a ridiculous group of people.
yeah the whole thing about nazism is literally the same shit adorno and horkheimer were getting at
I don't know if they do the same point.
The PragerU's argument is more like "drop reason".
The Adorno's argument is more in line with the concept of rationality of Max Weber, that involves four kind of rationality (instrumental, emotive, affective and value). Adorno say that Enlightenment focus only in instrumental rationality.
The critique of Enlightenment in the Frankfurt School is much more complex and insteresting than PragerU. And yeah, is very worth to be critical about Enlightenment. Enlightenment is very in line with teleological thinking, esencialism, colonialism, capitalism and a lot of shity things.
It's like how the Left and Right both want to DESTROY liberals and EVISCERATE the center... but for completely different reasons.
Hasn't Prager done one on the Frankfurt School? If not, they're the only wingnuts that haven't.
"Conservatism is good because a lot of influential historical figures were conservatives."
"Universal rationality is bad because Hitler used universal rationality, and he was bad."
I swear to God, this is how a child argues about politics...
Children are at least willing to learn for the most part. Not so at Prager U
Hitler drank water and look at what he did... So clearly water is bad and racist
IT SURE WORKS ON THE BARELY LITERATE I TELL YA.
Only because beliefs used to be considered progressive 100-200 years ago now are considered normal and have gone into conservative beliefs.
@Conor Malone What would be the steel man argument?
Conservative definition of skepticism: Outright rejection of an idea or way of thinking without any analysis or reason, just because it doesn't "feel" right.
PragerU wants you to go full flat earth
What happened to “facts don’t care about your feelings”? 🤔
There's a big difference between "skepticism" and "cynicism" that Praeger U would rather you just ignore.
@@FakeSugarVillain I wish they would go full flat earth
DragonSheep Yep, that’s how they have demonized altruism so well; simply by calling it virtue signaling.
I do wonder how successful it has been on the larger culture though, as there’s always the possibility that people against it are simply being louder, be it in volume or via repetition.
I literally laughed out loud when Tradition Man said we need to combat "dogmas" through adherance to tradition. Like, how can someone stare straight at their own cognitive dissonance like that for the entirety of the video making process without realizing it?
getting big cheques from rich fracking assholes probably helps a lot
You don;t Understand what He was saying. Tradition is not the same as Dogma, and that Alone discredits what You are Saying here.
@@skwills1629 Tradition is not in and of itself the same as dogma, but traditions that are blindly adhered to are dogmas.
@@pielover267 - No, Tradition Blindly Adhered to is simply Tradition that is Blindly Adhered to.
It is sloppy to Link Bad Thing with other Thing.
Especially if bad Ting is not necessarily Bad.
Its like saying Socialists like Free Health Care so all free Health Care Advocates are Socialists.
Also, Conservatives do not believe in Blind Adherance to Tradition, and Proper Engagement with others Ideas would be a Good Idea.
@@skwills1629 I would love to hear why you think "blindly adhering to X," is different from "treating X as incontrovertibly true."
Or is the problem that you're too much of a failure to know the definition of "dogma?"
PragerU: "Tradition is good. Like the traditional precedents set by Athens."
Anyone: "But didn't the Athenians establish those precedents through reason?"
PragerU: :|
PragerU: >:|
I caught that as well with the additional twist that Jewish and Greek conservatives of that era were probably apoplectic at the prospect of foreign ideas mixing with their traditions. ;)
Yes Greek traditions like lots of gay sex which conservatives love. Oh wait :(
@@blasphimus Nononono, the Greeks considered it perfectly straight and not gay at all unless you were a bottom, which brings up the debate of the differentiation of the very definition of certain values and concepts we take for granted across cultures and times, which is another thing that conservatives don't want to acknowledge.
Athenian democracy was as radical as it got in the 5th century BC. The people from PragerU would have been pro-aristocracy at the time.
To be fair, we don't really follow Athenian traditions. We follow the traditions of a few specific people in Athens.
Sadly, most of those people were idiots, and the actually *intelligent* people in Athens are roundly ignored.
Like, for instance, Diogenes.
Was he a funny meme man?
Yes.
Was he also a legitimately brilliant philosopher whose ideas have only become more relevant with the passing of time?
Also, yes.
As someone who’s actually studied National Socialism, the racial science of the NAZIS crossed the line into abstract philosophy pretty often. They were starting with their conclusion, and looking for rational, scientific ways to justify that conclusion - this is, of course, not how science and reason work.
Starting with a conclusion and trying to force reason and science to conform to it, is a practice far more common in conservative, religious group think, like that of PragerU.
They also had a huge hard-on for Germanic and Indo-Aryan mythology - which in itself wasn't the issue, the insane interpretetation was the issue. Zero scientific reason to be found here.
Don't mention to them that nazis burned The Origin of Species while keep Luther's book about Jews.
Prager U Debunked
I find it funny that PragerU didn't even catch that their ideology had flawed reasoning bc their own reasoning is as well.
"They were starting with their conclusion, and looking for rational, scientific ways to justify that conclusion - this is, of course, not how science and reason work."
Of course PragerU wouldn't be able to tell that kind of bad science from actual science: they think that method is perfectly fine and they do it all the time.
Edmund Spenser I can’t really think of any pseudoscientific beliefs that are inherent to or really have anything to do with progressive ideology. Could you enlighten me?
Unless you’re about to say something transphobic, in which case you can piss right off.
It's a little annoying how great response videos like this will never have more views than the original Prager U video
Maybe one day!
...probably not.
ditto, except by a “little annoying” i mean hella fuckin annoying
Right wing propaganda is all astroturfed and help up by dark billionaire money. It’s a paper tiger. Left wing propaganda tends to have grassroots support.
PragerU invests thousands into its marketing and outreach, of course it's going to get more hits. It's like an indie film competing against a Hollywood blockbuster lol
Hi, Novia! It's me, Sam, from the 12tone Discord server!
Also yeah, it is annoying for sure
"I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do, because I notice it always coincides with their own desires."-Susan B. Anthony
Conservatives: facts don’t care about your feelings
Also conservatives: ignore all facts and reason and just follow “tradition”!
Ally S
Praguuu’s thesis: Here’s the reasoning and rational facts behind the libtards being bad and why we’re not bad, so do what we say.
Praguuu: the worst people in the world have tried to justify bad things by claiming they have reason and rational for it to get people to do what they say, don’t trust it.
Mmmmmmmmmmmkay.
@@hayuseen6683 wtf are you saying?
@@sevenlikethenumber
I'm observing a comparison of contradictory statements and thematic rhetoric.
"Facts don't care about your feelings, only mine!" - PragerU
@@sevenlikethenumber they were saying p much
prager u: here's facts and reason
prager u: people use facts and reason to justify bad ideas dont trust them
Calling environmentalism a "new idea" is a recent innovation in conservative orthodoxy, not something grounded in religious tradition.
Totally agree with the crux of the video. A conservative's deepest desire is to just get his way without having to answer "Why?"
Actually, all three of the things mentioned at that part have been around for a long ass time lol
@@kipper1668 If you take the Garden of Eden as an allegory for the goodness of nature over technology, or even take the literal text of God's instructions to Adam, environmentalism can be traced to the very beginning of Abrahamic religions.
In the UK Environmentalism isn’t a partisan issue - conservatives are generally environmentally conscious here too
@@quantumblurrr Unless you mention wind turbines.
I love how calmly Hozoni tells us not to think and be a conservative
Tyler F yah it’s sad that people actually watch Prager U
Remember how all bad people rationalize their behavior? Yeah, that's why I act completely irrationally.
PU: Be a conservative.
Me: Why?
PU: You're far too gone, sir.
He doesn't tell us not to think, though
Proverbs 3:5 says “Trust in the Lord with all your heart, and lean not on your own understanding.”
I had to memorize this and listen to many sermons saying not to think so much and have more ~faith~. They literally raise children to deliberately switch off their brains.
It's the same argument that creationists use: "Science gets things wrong! Thus, you must reject science!"
Yeah, but the way we found out science was wrong was to use more science. The way we found out that people claiming to use "reason" weren't actually doing so was because we used more reason.
If only they actually cared about history.
"We can learn a lot from ancient teachings."
Hey, wanna learn about the technology held by people from Gobekli Tepe?
What about the hunting techniques used by the Mohawk?
Or the spirituality of people in Egypt?
"No. Not like that."
Pick a *history* any *history* !
"Egyptian"
Not THAT *history*
Fantastic point!
luckjes112 haverkamp Dennis Prager is a young-earth creationist, so he probably doesn‘t even think Göbekli Tepe is a real place because it would contradict his beliefs.
"Mum!!!! They're doing history wroooong!! 😭😭😭"
Not to mention they say they love Ancient Greece but I'm pretty sure they're against homosexual relationships.
And they say Athens is the pinnacle of reasoning, when it still participated in a pointless war with Sparta that weakened Greece as a whole and made it easier for the Romans to overthrow them.
PragerU: we put too much effort in the Enlightenment! Those ideas came from before then!
Medieval Muslim Scholars and Scientists: 🙂
PragerU: not like that
Thank you
In their weirdo fantasy land they're also using the "American language", they quantify using "American numbers and maths" and write using "American letters".
They're delusional.
Marijn Tak I bet they unironically serve “Freedom Fries” in the cafeteria.
@@ReturnToSenderz I bet they even think "apartheid" was their Idea; and they pretend to be sorry for it. :')
I'm sure these are the same people who are convinced that Jesus of Nazareth was a blue eyed, English speaking blond.
My evil leftist agenda is to educate people while helping them love and appreciate each other.
See! The commie finally admits it! Get 'im!
Oooooooooh someone trying to help everyone get along and enjoy themselves while not harming anyone! Get him!
This does not age well looking at the coming riots. You can’t force love apparently eh?
@@asscheeks3212 brack people
Self Improvement Journey da wites and ASEAN Nu-Z’s, muh Russia
As a Jew, I can tell you that the word "Judeo-Christian" is so funny to hear due to our many major differences
Ich seh's anders One giant difference that can completely separate us is our acknowledgement of biblical imperfection. I can’t speak for Christians but a majority that I’ve seen say that the bible is completely perfect as it’s written by god and has no flaws in it. Us Jews recognize that each book within the bible was written by a man which can open up the possibility of imperfections! Most books probably aren’t even our books because they draw big parallels to other ancient books, such as the story of Noah being similar to that of the Epic of Gilgamesh
@@issa3789 I Agree that most Christians (I've meet) view it that way but there were some who agreed that there a logical contradictions in the entire story from start to finish (to which they also blamed the imperfect nature) .... I was looking for differences in the Beliefe or maybe in the view on God (who he is, what hw wants etc)? Can you provide differences in that regard?
Greetings
Ich seh's anders A giant belief would be the belief in a messiah. Christians view Jesus as the son of god, a messianic figure. I’ve heard some say that Jesus is actually god but Imm not sure if that’s accurate. We believe that the messiah hasn’t come yet and even then, our ideas of a messiah is different. I’m sure you know how the Christian messiah is seen as so I’ll just describe the Jewish messiah. We believe that the messiah is gonna be a human leader instead of a divine being sent to clean us of our sins. The messiah is going to lead us to a better future with stronger unity for the most part
@@issa3789 I think the Bible makes more sense that way, since a lot of the seeming contradictions in the Bible seem to actually be conflicts between the letter of the text and Churches' dogmas; for example, Abraham is described as a Chaldean of Ur, which would mean that the Mesopotamian cosmology in Genesis isn't stolen but rather rightfully inherited as Abraham would himself be a Mesopotamian who lived long before Moses and the Mosaic Laws and probably grew up worshipping the Anunnaki.
Another example is textual conflicts between books written by opposing authors that are only contradictions if you're being told both were written by the same Author, God.
It seems instead that the conflicting books were written by different authors with opposing views and included together to give the reader all sides so they can decide for themselves who's right.
Israel is Pro-Choice, has Universal Health Care and some of the more relaxed Marijuna Laws in the world.
Remind this to Conservatives who are so gung-ho to defend Israel. Blows their minds!
Why does Joel have the same painting twice? Does he want more? Should I sent him another one?
#DonateJoelANewPainting
#DonateJoelANewPainting
#DonateJoelANewPainting
#DonateJoelANewPainting
We share the same first name! :D It's nice to meet another Claudia in the comment section.
#DonateJoelANewPainting
By "American traditions" he means the traditions of indigenous people of America, surely. The ones that existed for thousands of years before the nation stated we now know as the United States was founded. That's why the PraegerU video links to Ojibwe lessons, right? Not gonna check, but I'm sure they're there.
And you would have fought on the side of the various warring native American tribes against the evil imperialist colonists during the settling of America right? If you were a settler - sorry, evil imperialist scum - in the mid 18th century in say, rural western New York or Pennsylvania, for example, you would have fled your home, family, county, and colony in order to help end western imperialism and fight with the peaceful Indigineous People™ to keep their land and traditions, is that correct?
Which Indigenous People™s land do you occupy today white woman, and in what ways have you made amends to restore the lands you've stolen back to the ownership of the people of the tribes on whose land you now occupy? Or are you content just handing out links to Ojibwe lessons instead of making real progress?
@@betterat3751 I wouldn't say evil considering how the world worked then, but I would say terrible based on the fact that people should have empathy and maybe we could've annexed them without removing and wiping them out.
@@defox5019 Could've, would've, should've. This is just anachronistic moral superimposition and standard holding on an empire and subsequent fledgling nation that never gets applied to any other dynasty or empire in history.
War is war and America isn't somehow uniquely terrible because we didn't peacefully annex everything west of the Hudson river valley and grant all the warring tribes citizenship.
Not to mention there's no evidence any of those defeated tribes would have shown us the same anachronistic consideration. They would have done what everyone else did at the time, murder the problematic fighting age men, and subjugate the women, forcing them to convert to their religion and way of life. Which is exactly what happened to many colonial women and families during this time.
@Jacob Wood I'm not rationalizing it dummy, I'm just saying they were pretty cruel and shouldn't have committed genocide, dumbass.
@DeFox 501: You know most of the Native American deaths were caused by Smallpox and other diseases, right?
"Tradition is just peer pressure from dead people"
-Unknown
@Snehil Singh literally no
@Snehil Singh If you need tradition to keep you from descending into hedonism, what does that say about you?
@Snehil Singh no you’re just afraid of change and the unknown.
Well for me tradition is an identity for my nation, tradition is what keep us together with even with thousand island, and it's the thing that keep us move forward to modernization
So tradition and culture is the one that keeps us unified and and moving forward
The Pony Express is the traditional way Americans get their news and mail. What is Prager U doing on TH-cam?
The idea is to apply ever-evolving technology to never-evolving morality.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
@@infamedepatates2502 specifically, only 18 months
@@infamedepatates2502 you’re right. They should probably be contacting people with ooga boogas.
That's why they don't trust the Covid vaccine. It's new and therefore SCARY!
imagine being so reactionary that the 1800s are too progressive for you
wtf even is "anglo-scottish skepticism" and why does he refer to it like it's a thing in the general consciousness of our society
Scotland even was quite the hotbed for Enlightenment thought in the 18th century, they're contradicting themselves lol. PragerU will never show the whole picture if they're talking history, only the fragments that could support the bullshit argument that ol' Dennis is trying to make.
Because "anglo-scottish" sounds even more "white" than "anglo-saxon" and Prager "U" will sneak white supremist ideas in wherever they can even if it means making up nonsense terms.
Ironically, he is referring to enlightenment philosophers who were influential in skeptic thinking, such as John Stuart Mill (English) and David Hume (Scottish).
I don't know how to interpret that as anything other than a dog whistle.
that's when yer da doesnae ken whit's gaen on
"Our Justice System is good as hell."
lol
I get the joke.
Hell isn't perfect, but it's the best system we have
Kyle
Jreg heffley
@@d3vitron779 Always nice to meet a fellow Jregian
JREGAMERS RISE UP!
@@kyle9401 I also recognized the Jreg joke :)
for people who don't know, it's referencing to this - th-cam.com/video/5nu6QEjMXRg/w-d-xo.html
Saying that hitler was rational, therefore we shouldn’t be rational has the same energy as Onision saying that talking causes genocide, so we shouldn’t talk
Edit: thanks for the likes guys
In both cases the brain-head behind the sentence is a borderline-sociopathic narcissist, so you might be unto something.
Also hot take, it takes a complete monter to claim Nazi ideology bares even a passing resemblance to rationality.
@@XxThunderflamexX To people who don't understand human rationality, it does. It's the same sort of people who argue that morality comes from a god, so atheists shouldn't have a problem with Hitler since they have no objective standard of morality, except we do. It's called the veil of ignorance.
@@BrutalKnight55 that's not what the veil of ignorance normally refers to but yeah overall you're right.
Well, veil of ignorance can be used as a foundation for morality, it's just more commonly used as a way to make a fair society.
I think the reasons PragerU doesn’t state their conclusions/arguments outright are twofold. First, its a powerful tactic to allow someone to make the connections and thoughts within their own mind. Once its your brain drawing the conclusions you’re more likely to believe those conclusions, because they are yours. Second, it allows them some amount of plausible deniability. PragerU gets to act like someone is putting words in their mouth when one of their ideas is taken to a conclusion and argued against.
Or You are Reading into it the Worst Possible Moivation because You don;t Like them.
Not stating your conclusion outright is a practice common in politics because it gives people the ability to deny responsibility when their beliefs are taken to thenlogical extreme, so I’m not surprised that pragerU uses it in almost every video.
@@cobblegen1204 - But is PragerU worth the level of Condemnation it gets? By that I mean,is it Far Worse Really than others? Salon has said some Wonderfully Bizarre things over the Years for example, and I Read an Article by Phil Zuckerman where He conflates "Devout" and "Pius" with "Conservative Evangelical Christian", claiming Devout Churches are those who Believe all of what The Bible Says and do not Doubt, and views "Moderate" Churches are thus depicted as believing Less in their Religion,being More Secular, and having more Doubts, and thus being Less Devout.
Then He equated Devoutly Religious with specific Political Views, and claimed "The Most Devout" Christians were less Moral than Secular People, because they disagree with Him Politically on Gun Control, Immigration, and Abortion.
He also said the most Devout Christians are those who Least Believe n Science citing Climate Change.
So, if You are not an Evangelical Protestant, You must not be Devout.
And if You are Devout, You vote Republican.
He also said The Catholic Church ran the Moat Extensive Paedophile Ring in Human History which is just Ridiculous.
@@skwills1629 you have a serious problem dodging discussions by whatabouting into side stories that you then make a false equivalence with.
@@BazzBrother - Saying Whjataboutism is getting Dull. Why not accuse Me of projection too, and say I am the perfect example of Dunning-Krueger. It is not Whataboutism to Show how You have Unjustified Double Standards in how You assess materials. Though Ironically accusing People of Whataboutism is a way for you to Dodge their Questions. I didn't Dodge Anything, since I asked the Question.
And its not a False Equivolence. Prager U is more Accurate than Sources you'd see No problem with.
The American Revolution was definitely a conservative idea... Definitely nothing enlightening or liberal about rising up against a long standing monarchy
It was conservative only in the sense of a smaller government
Sawyer Northrop “Smaller government.” What does that even mean? A less centralized government is inherently liberal. “Small government” is a meme to be applied selectively wherever American conservatives want to weaken a public program.
@@Zarastro54 fair in terms of contemporary politics, but strictly in terms of "what is the government able to do" it's a smaller government
bh5496 how is a less centralized government inherently liberal? I'm pretty sure feudalism was pretty decentralized.
@@Zarastro54 like, the whole reason the constitution was created, was because the more decentralized option (ie The Articles of Confederation) wasn’t working.
Lmao, I‘m studying history and in one of our lectures Steven Pinker was used as an example of exactly how NOT to interpret the enlightenment period
Talk about an academical roast.
I literally had a uni lecture about the Enlightenment last week; the way that Pinker approaches the topic is the complete opposite of anything resembling sound historical study. What a doofus.
Disappointed Turtle Thank fucking God. I thought I was going insane seeing so much support for that superficial ideological piece of shit.
Are any of the lectures online anywhere I wanna learn a history
...
"These ideas [socialism, feminism, environmentalism] deserve to be met with some *good old-fashioned Anglo-Scottish skepticism*"... What a truly gross phrase.
When "Anglo-Saxon" is a little too on the nose
@@LimeyLassen You can almost hear the wasps buzzing around.
Layne Benofsky
Brilliant pun, sir!
I’m sure the Scottish would be very offended.
Mary Wollstonecraft: "Am I a joke to you?"
One problem with tradition is that everyone has different traditions, so they can never be used objectively.
I think it's precisely because people want to avoid being objective that they would want to argue from tradition anyway
Societies form around Taditions and the ppoint is, they are Shared.
@@skwills1629 at what point does a centuries old revolutionary idea become tradition, and a millennia old tradition become outdated?
@@BazzBrother - You assume ideas work in a linear Pattern. They do not.
@@skwills1629 Except, they're objectively not shared? Using just the US as a pretense, every state alone has different traditions. The indigenous tribes (from the surplus of north american tribes, inuit, and Hawaiian indigenous people) here before the European settlers had wildly different traditions. You can not possibly enforce every single one of those at once, it's physically impossible, from the sheer number alone as well as the fact these traditions contradict each other regularly. This doesn't even include the over 100 countries all around the world with equally as diverse ideas of traditional.
What conservatives often mean by traditional is 1950's American dream. Women being home makes, men being bread winners, ultra capitalism, not a trace of LGBTQ visibility, and so on. Just watching Prager U's other videos on gay people, marriage, and general social stances as a whole prove this
The right is really out there saying:
logic is canceled now.
I saw a video saying we should abandon all nuance because lefties use details to waste time and confuse people or something.
I'd really wish that the far left and right weren't more vocal than the somewhat more neutral left and right, it really just makes divides in us when we think the other side is absolutely insane.
I've long since realised that "common sense" really is a made up phrase (and not in the sense that all words are made up). "Common sense" is invoked when people purport to be all about sensible and practical thinking, but all they're really saying is "this thing is obvious to me and therefore it should be obvious to you" and I'm like... No. Just because you see something a certain way does not mean that I should also see it that way. Those two words don't magically change that. Make an actual argument rather than hiding behind them.
True, women not voting was common sense back then for example.
@@kkounal974
Still is in some parts of the world.
Problem with common sense is that it is not that common.
I personally noticed this when I read a couple manga where the emotional conflict or the punchline to a joke is “well that doesn’t follow common sense” but I’m not Japanese so neither the common sense or the uncommon sense belong to me 😂
Thomas Paine would like to a have an conversation
I like how they mention their ideals are founded on ancient Greek philosophy but gloss over that the ancient Greeks were A-okay with homosexuality
Edit: Spelling
Sadly, though, Ancient Greece was mostly only okay with male homosexuality, not gay women. So in that respect, they were more progressive that the Victorians, but less progressive than 21st century America. If PragerU really wanted to emulate Ancient Greece, they would still be quite bad.
Alexander Will Don‘t forget pederasty
Alexander Will The point was that they actually don’t, though, because they’re only taking the parts they agree with while ignoring every other belief. That’s not quite how it works. You can find ideas you agree with in practically any doctrine or ideology if you look hard enough, but you can’t just choose a few things you already fundamentally agreed with and say that you have adopted *all* of that entity’s ideals for the sake of making your argument look better.
@@raggedymuffinz Well said.
@@manospondylus man when i was researching that it was so surreal. i mean for one they did actually call it pederasty, i had always assumed that was a name we had retroactively applied from the future, yk? but nope.
and second, a bunch of writings from back then are almost identical to some things certain gay guys will still say today about how vaginas are gross and smelly. i was like, what am i even reading again? this was meant to be a great philosopher? and then the thing i read started going off into "now, lubed up boy thighs - THAT'S where it's at" and i was like. ok i'm done
and closed the tab lol
Science isn't bad, _Hitler's_ science was bad. I also love how their little graphic for feminism is just like, 3 women. Like, "Uh oh, watch out everybody, it's *~tHe WoMeN.~"*
Hitler didn't do science, he did pseudo-science. Back then it was way easier to popularize some idea as being scientific because the general public didn't knew much about how science was supposed to work
i wonder how they'd feel about the nazis burning down that trans clinic
“Contemporary art involves the scatological.” Man, youd think Dennis Prager would HATE Mozart.
urine and FECES
LECK MICH IM ARSCH!!!! - Mozart, feces loving man
Don't forget Aristophanes and Chaucer....
@@movimentodoscacos let me repeat that:
URINE AND FECES!
I suspect that privately, Dennis Prager is really into scatological stuft and would enjoy a "golden shower".
I enjoyed this mini-series wholeheartedly. Hoping to see some more similar stuff in the future.
Same
Shaun has handful of good videos on PragerU as well if you haven't already seen them.
Shadow Skull
You’re ridiculous. PragerU will always need debunking. Every day in the US, around the world, young men and women are introduced to this type of ideology. Content like Joel’s are a necessity.
i approve this message
Shadow Skull
Ah, yes. I see your point.
Edit: but aren’t we doing that? If you are like me, a socdem lefty in the US, we are in the midst of combatting right wing ideology and moving our aims to actual legislative change like affordable housing and M4A. Leaders like AOC and Ro Khanna.
I assume when they say Ancient Greece and Jerusalem they ignore all the bisexuality, polyamory and helping the poor and teachings about how the rich should give away all their money...
Also i feel like conservatives whouldnt take a liking to hedonism, Diogenes or cynicism, especially în its old sense (fuck soceity, lets live. like dogs)
@@anduro7448 im sure they'd have a meltdown if they met diogenes today. "You should be conservative! You're from ancient greece!" "Behold a man!"
@@bezerker2173 Ah lets not forget other things Diogenes did:
Urinating on wealthy Athenians that disrespectfuly threw bones at him
on the note of rich people
His quote "in a rich man’s house there is no place to spit but his face."
Masturbating in public
Overall just hedonism and not caring what soceity says and doing whatever floats your boat
I mean he wasnt your avarage ancient greek person but he was admired by many , notably stoicists which he directly influenced
When conservatives say 'common sense' what they are really doing is appealing to the status quo.
Yup
No, it's actual objectivity. It used to be called common sense because most people applied it. It's not common today so should just be called logic
@@edwinamendelssohn5129 Logic has nothing to do with common sense. Sense, by definition, is the opposite of logic.
@@tdb517 no, they are synonymous
@@edwinamendelssohn5129 Check the definitions, they're not
"Ah, tradition, otherwise known as peer pressure from dead people!"
Edit; I do believe in maintaining traditional practises in religions, cultures etc especially ones historically erased by the white man, I want to be very clear in the fact that I do find value in and support the preservation of cultural heritage + traditions in the modern world. That said, my comment is being made as a white person in the western world facing family and societal peer pressure+expectations that I refuse to participate in due to them not suiting my lifestyle + choices. I personally believe some traditions need to be stopped for medical reasons (female genital mutilation, circumcision, piercing ears of a child under age 5 etc due to medical complications, lack of consent, etc) but that the majority of traditions enrich peoples lives + give them a connection to their ancestors which should not be discounted or abandoned.
this is an anti-indigenous sentiment
We dont reinvent the wheel every new generation. Why would we do that with sociology and morals?
@@Stormvermin-bx1lh Cause morals and sociology that have stagnated for centuries won't get us any farther. To elaborate on your reductive metaphor, you can't fly to the moon on a wheelcart
@@xaphaniariel2797 Tearing down is not upgrading.
@@Stormvermin-bx1lh It is when you don't consider people like me to be people.
"Anglo-Scottish"? "Judeo-Christian" (represented by Jerusalem and Athens somehow)
I just love how the case for tradition involves bunching together two "traditions" that traditionally were violently incompatible.
Add "White" to that list.
gotta love anglo-scottish, whatever happened to just saying British? Or do Welsh traditions really stray that far?
@@iseemtobelost8265 I suspect it's another subtle way to dupe people. By using a less generic and mainstream term (and one with a dash!) they give lesser informed viewers who don't know any better the impression of being more sophisticated and educated. Using such a term must mean that this stuff has been properly and professionally studied and not just pulled out of their ass, right?
@@siukong Or they really don't want to come out and say the truth (as per Limey's addition).
My guess is that this particular traditionalist was referring to some philosophers who happen to be English and some who happen to be Scottish.
Considering the image at 12:34 includes John Selden (English and Misspelled), David Hume (Scottish), Adam Smith (Scottish) and Edmund Burke (Irish catholic, who held positions in England and Scotland), it seems likely.
@@siukong exactly
Pretty ironic that the "redpill" channel is literally telling you thought and reason are bad things and that you should just be a sheep
The whole alt-right pill thing is highly ironic because The Matrix was written by two transwomen and was written as an allegory for being trans. The pill colors even reflect early hrt.
@@gliscorpropagandaaccount1764 it's quite sad how the great concept of taking the red pill has been completely twisted by incels who unironically believe that men are worldwide more oppressed than women.
@@gliscorpropagandaaccount1764 how is the matrix an allegory for being trans? Honest question I've never heard this take before.
@@squirrel1331 yeah wtf I've never heard of that too, im interested
@@squirrel1331 the red pill was one of the terms for HRT at the time the movie came out. It was less a metaphor the movie was built on and more symbolism that they snuck in.
Isn’t it weird how many conservatives are being silenced but I literally never hear the end of anything they think?
And how there are still no physical barriers to their way of life? Well, I guess there is, if you consider harassment and persecution a part of your way of life
"Conservatives are being silenced? Damn I wish it worked, shut the fuck up."
Anytime a conservative comedian faces a little backlash from teenagers on Twitter for being bigoted they whine that they're being silenced/cancelled/having their first amendment rights attacked, and they always do it *during* a set they're performing in front of a massive crowd of adoring fans, and there's never any significant negative effect on their career. They're literally insane, I'm sure of it.
@@thevulpinecollective in fact they do even better when they have controversy, and that’s the biggest cosmic joke. All this discourse over censorship and so many of these people have never done better financially or had more of a very devoted built in audience. Some people will like things solely because there is some kind of fake controversy
Conservatives see any disagreement with their perspective as "being silenced" bc under their authoritarian mindset; only complete unquestioning obeying is accepted
It legit fascinates me how arbitrary conservative adherence to "tradition" is. They're not primitivists, they obviously believe *some* progress has been acceptable, but they just draw lines in the sand on a whim, purely to fit their own agendas. Like "okay, that's *enough* logic and progress thanks". Boggles my mind how shaky and random the foundations of their ideology are.
That's the reason why I've always been kinda skeptical on conservatism, especially the "reject modernity, embrace tradition" style. They seem to have no problem with any kind of technological and scientifical advance, unless it's about gender, race, evolution, climate change or technological stuff such as microchips and 5G
@@marcello7781 Because tradition is just a scapegoat for the authoritarianism that characterises the Authoritarian Right (Conservative) but they need a scapegoat as they want to pretend to be Classical Libertarian which is the Libertarian Right ie the social polar opposite so they need a narrative to mask the authoritarianism to prop up their curtailment of bodily autonomy like drug and abortion laws amongst others.
The lines they draw are no whims, but a calculated manipulation to garner votes. Every single position they hold, there's a collective conservative think tank baking of any particular issue that isn't partisan, so that when it comes out of their witch's oven, it becomes partisan. Abortion is an issue meant to appeal to religions' stance on birth control in general, and they do as much as they can to obfuscate knowledge so people who might change their stance don't know why prenatal care is bad or why women who had miscarriages needed a late term abortion. Police brutality means the police are always justified in their use of force, victims are attacked postmortem, and violent murderers eager to be violent can call themselves heroes so long as they have a badge and no video evidence to the contrary exists.
They do this in such a way so that any particular issue is entwined with every other issue in a set of values that you must adhere to, or else you're against God, you're against families, you're against law and order, you're against unfettered access to guns that you need because minorities are out to get you. Oppose the liberals who want free stuff paid by your taxes, the extinction of heterosexual couples, socialism that is exactly the same as the corrupt system of Soviet communism, violent criminals to go free and unpunished, just oppose everything that sounds bad as we describe it, just don't look into why people have beliefs, don't look into facts, don't have critical thinking, just be obedient because we are God's children and we know best (snorts a line of cocaine). And they've created a sheep army that are all Meghan McCain who think they're right if they just talk the loudest.
The scariest thing is that it works. They get their votes. Anti-intellectualism invents "wealthy coastal elites" as an all-encompassing bogeyman as an answer to any and all education on any given topic. And now, they can make up lies and conspiracy theories to fuel the paranoia of their most vulnerable gaslit base. People who call Obama a Nazi, but agree that Nazis are very fine people. People who simultaneously insist the Civil War was a "war of Northern aggression" started by a tyrant president, yet a president that was Republican who was more inline with modern conservative values, a war that was fought over states' rights and not slavery, Confederate leaders must have statues honoring them because it's erasing history to take down the statues and it's not erasing history to pretend traitorous slave mongers don't have numerous documents and records of their racism and motivations. Sorry for the rant, but Jesus Christ, how has it gotten so bad?
@@TigerNightmare Anthropologists are still scratching their heads on "how has it gotten so bad"
The constant is the maintenance of hierarchy. That's it. That's the foundation. Currently the capitalists are at the top of the hierarchy so that shaped what progress is acceptable.
After spending my whole life, up until my mid-20s, indoctrinated in this type of thinking, it was absolutely *_mind blowing_* to realize that, *yes,* thinking progressively is _OKAY._ It even made *more* sense than the bullshit "Judeo-Christian-Anglo-Scottish" values I had been subjected to. When you live in a moral vacuum, you have no *idea* that there are thoughts and values *outside* of those being force-fed to you.
I bet you are still anti feminism and anti environmentalism lol.
I do love my ancestors of Scottish descent on both sides of my family because they were a bunch of farmers on one side who were constantly caring for their land and living off it well, and a bunch of preachers on the other side who were acting against Nazis. At least that was my great-grandparents.
Hitler: I am rational.
Me: Prove it.
PragerU: omg guys being rational must be bad, let's stop thinking forever
It's so funny how they use "statistical evidence" to back their arguments in an effort to appeal to rationality and "cold hard facts" and then make a video about how rationality is bad
*only the rationality that benefits their arguments. But thats not rationality, pe se, its "common sense"
Even better, when their cold hard facts are just baseless lies, like "all the modern problems in the world were caused by non-religious thinking"
They are not Arguing that Rationality is bad.
I love how he cherry-picked with examples of Hitler and Marx (who being put side by side make me laugh) as how science leads to bad people doing bad things. Yet he never talks about how religion has lead to wars. Or how conservative thinking has been used to suppress popular revolts. Glad Hank is leading the good fight
Edit for spelling error.
Religion wasn’t the problem, the problem were the people at the top who wanted money which has nothing to do with religion because greedy people exist everywhere even in non-religious places.
@@planelattice2783 True, there are greedy people in the absence of religion. Religion however does serve as an overwhelmingly powerful force through which greedy people can exploit others. Adherents will willingly follow an exploiter to escape eternal damnation and social ostracization. Without religion someone could still exploit others through ostracization. However without religion someone cannot be exploited for fear of eternal, "worse than you can possibly imagine" torture. And many people will do whatever it takes financially to escape those fiery pits and those scary, pitchfork wielding demons.
@@Jon.A.Scholt I agree with you but my point was to put the blame in the right place.
He did not Argue "Science makes People do bad things". Conservatives are not Anti-Science.
Also, the Conflict between Religion and Science doesn't Exist. Its not like You must choose to either believe in Religion or believe in Science.
Religion has also never lead to Wars. Even the Wars Of Religion in Early Modern Europe were over more than just this Thing called Religion.
Also, Conservative Thinking is often whatever a Liberal disagrees with even if it is Historically liberal. Like viewing all Race based Policies as "Conservative" when many were advocated by Liberals of their Era, and opposed by Conservatives.
@@Jon.A.Scholt - Rdeligion is not Christianity. And the whole fear of Eternal Damnation Manipulation Tactic is a Myth, not Real History.
Are we just going to ignore the fact that conservativism and progress are literally, by definition, incompatible? 😂
We live in a world of weasel words where it depends on your definition of "Conservatism" and "progress".
One of the major selling points of Conservatism these days is the idea that they will conserve progress while Progressives will lose what progress we've made, gambling it away by trying to make any more progress.
@@autobotstarscream765 but conservatives aren't preserving progress made, Prager U literally wants to take it away.
@@locafries3004 This is why some would call PragerU Regressives for wanting to turn the clock back.
Theres more nuance to it you dumb kid.
@@semi-mojo I mean... conservatism started out as a movement against the French Revolution that wanted to preserve the aristocracy because they believed poor people shouldn't rule themselves. This is literally what Edmund Burke, the guy who conservatives today point to as the father of conservatism, wanted. Burke had spent his life getting close to the aristocracy and had garnered so much power within the system... that he didn't want it to go away when the French Revolution started because the French people were sick of being ruled by the rich.
Burke disagreed that the poor should have any power in the government. He believed that the poor needed to be ruled by an aristocracy. But he realized they couldn't go back to noble families and kings... so he decided the best way to determine who should be the rulers was to let the rich rule over everyone... because somehow that means they were most fit to rule. Burke wanted the rich... to govern... because then the rich could maintain their power... aka a modern aristocracy. So that's what conservatism is based on... not wanting to go to a true system of Democracy where the common civilian actually has power.
So I would say that modern conservatism was born out of resistance to progress and that's all it ever was. It never advocated for progress.
It funny how mentions Hilter's eugenics but forgetS he learned it from America
Here's a fun tradition: all the major cities spending tons of taxpayer money to build sewers at the end of the 19th century. So much less dysentery, huge economic growth for using taxpayer money to improve the health of the population.
I hate, ABSOLUTE HATE, the term "common sense". Common sense, what, like sight, hearing, touch, taste, smell? Those are common senses. Knowing fire is hot is common sense. Political science is NOT common sense.
I just replace it with “groupthink” and it makes a lot more sense.
Common sense can be helpful in certain circumstances, as it is essentially the brain’s shortcut. Common sense says don’t run out into the middle of a busy freeway. But this mental intuition only works for the most basic of ideas and can lead us to incorrect conclusions when something requires more complex and abstract thought. Common sense says if you drop a bowling ball and a penny from a height, the bowling ball should fall faster.
Common sense just means that which is intuitive to whoever is saying it. It’s practically circular reasoning, but without the reasoning bit.
You can't make a lightbulb or put a computer together using 'common sense', let alone handle the intricacies of an entire society. To say otherwise is to claim that everything is straightforward and nothing can be counterintuitive.
@K. B.L There is a slight difference between common sense and sense (which is synonymous with reason). Common sense is a term that can be thrown around by people that disagree and want to argue that their own beliefs are just common sense while anyone that disagrees with them must be unreasonable or stupid. Common sense can also be synonymous with 'sense' in certain contexts. But in this video, they made it clear that they're not using 'common sense' to mean reason, rationality, logic, skepticism or all those other thought intensive words they seem to hold in disdain and fear. Their argument is that we should replace careful, logical thought with our gut feeling or intuition, which they call 'common sense'. They don't call it what it is; gut feeling or intuition, because then the flaws in their reasoning would become obvious; it's clear that intuition is insufficient for anything with enough nuance or complication to grasp intuitively, we can not even build a toaster using our gut feeling, let alone fix complicated societal issues, and people can have immoral gut feelings- for example that it's 'just wrong' for people of different races to get married or for a married woman to have a job; so they use common sense as a euphemism to skirt around this, since common sense *often* means reason, something we can all get behind (just not here). It's a very anti intellectualist argument to say the least.
Wow they really are saying the quiet parts pretty darn loud
You know, the infuriating part is that the premise of re-examining the enlightenment is a really interesting one. Philosophy Tube has a really interesting video about african philosophy in which it shows how an Ethiopian philosopher puts forward similar ideas to Descartes. Some medieval nun schools produced ideas similar to Protestantism way before Luther. The political ideas of the Enlightenment can be traced back through history to many different contributors. But then again, it is PragerU, and they fly of the handle really quickly.
"married men work about 400 hours more, go to church more and bars less"
thats not making the argument they think it is
Yes it is.
Yay, if I get married I can work more. What an incentive.
@@SorowFame - It is if You Understand what This Actually means. It is discussing Employment, as well a Social good. Not simply Longer work Hours.
@@skwills1629 Jesus Christ I hope I don’t get a job that makes go to work for 400 more hours for slightly more money
@@noyes8882 - That's not the Argument.
It's almost a pretty _honest_ moment from them, to go right for "don't think, thinking is bad, just do what is _traditional"_
It's also worth noting that I don't think Prageru ever actually makes an argument for anything. They set one up, the start heading in the general direction of an argument, and then they sort of veer away, relying mostly on implications to lead a viewer towards assumptions. They don't really do anything particularly well, but they put just enough effort into this cowardly approach to persuasion to be able to catch naive people (and in my estimation there are a good number of naive people out there, especially in America) and at the same time not having any concrete point makes it more difficult to persuasively debunk them.
I mean, if I wasn't a person who just immediately saw through their BS, would I be as willing to listen to cogent counterpoints right after I've been coaxed into close-mindedly only following "tradition"? And of course by tradition, those of us on the left know they mean the right-wing corruption of Christianity, American-Conservative politics, and (let's just whisper this part) FASCISM. All set to a sanitized aesthetic and a vaguely 1950s-fantasy worldview that conservative types romanticize.
Prageru is really a quite dangerous propaganda company. They're _preaching_ for the abandonment of reason in favor of a dark-ages style society. The latter bit they haven't quite taken off the mask for, yet, but it's pretty clear to me that that is what they're gesturing towards. A time of great oppression and corruption and misery... but when a select few were immensely powerful.
I mean, the Praeger U video in question dissed the Enlightenment, that was pretty "mask-off"
I don't really like punching right, but yea PragerU is pretty bad, they just aren't very rigorous. I mean the graphs without labeled axis are just hilarious imo
Big Joel's hair is a metaphor for my whole life.
I'm so sad it's gone!
Definitely a spirit animal
*Anglo-Scottish Skepticism: “exists”*
Irish People: Aight Imma Head Out.
I mean they were one of the last groups to get "white" status so if you want to be traditional you do have to exclude them.
The fuck you mean imma head out we never wanted to be with this shit
shsjjs saw this comment just as he said it... im english and no scottish person would want to be linked with us like that
I don’t get it
I'm Scottish but Imma also head out
Prager U’s arguments for marriage are a concentration of the best arguments against marriage.
Oh come on, they just wanna save you from being immoral 😂
No they aren't
100THG LOIKERS BASBYT!!!!!!!!!!11111111111111111111!!!!!!!!!!
I can't get over his apparent assertion that Conservatism pre-dated the Enlightenment. What exactly does he think they were trying to conserve? Also most modern Conservatives generally don't intentionally promote thier politics as a synonym for Feudalism. It's not a good look.
Right, that was my point. Conservatism was created as a reaction to the enlightenment. It doesn't make any sense of "conserve" something if that thing hasn't gone away yet.
@@JebeckyGranjola wait…
@@JebeckyGranjola Forgot to change accounts? or did you forget you posted this, saw your own comment and agree with yourself?
@@charlietheron8947 I think he may have been talking to someone, he started saying: "Right, that was my point" as if he was talking to someone else.
That is conservatism in general: "don't think; just follow". These people are cowards.
It’s funny, I’ve seen them saying the exact same thing about liberals. They love to use the phrase “listen and believe” to attack leftist views and imply that conservatism is inherently more rational. Fuckin’s strange time to be alive.
“They follow the beliefs of other people? Unbased. Why can’t they follow the belifs to traditon”
@Dalen Lewin "but liberals are left winged" 《---- this guy
Aren't liberals center-right capitalists?
It's not really though. Maybe from the outside it can look like that, but just because someone doesn't arrive at the same philosophy or conclusion as you doesn't mean they don't think and just mindlessly swallow what they're fed.
@@krombopulos_michael when they actually make an argument that has any substance to it _at all_ - then I'll take them seriously as ideological opponents. When all they've got is the offerings of PragerU and such-like intellectual power-houses, there really isn't much to work with.
How can they not see that the motto of the Third Reich was basically "Make Germany Great Again"?
PragerU literally claiming that "facts and logic don't matter."
_"PragerU...the blog that thinks it's a university."_ - potholer54
I'm pretty sure they don't honestly think that. They know what they are. They just have monetary incentive to pretend otherwise.
Dennis Prager is a puppet Koch and fossil fuels and other shitbag corporatists. He's one of their TH-cam propaganda platforms.
The National Health Service is a part of my English history and tradition.
Tradition is inherently morally worthy.
Therefore nationalise every healthcare system.
The values of the True Leveller Diggers are far more traditional than these fascist fucks.
Therefore we must hold all our property in common and establish a Christian anarchist utopia.
The entire video is just the intellectual version of
" You drink water? So did Hitler!"
" You like animals? So did Hitler!"
You like rationality and science? So did Hitler!
So basically, Hitler Ate Sugar.
Nah, not at all.
meg elizabeth that’s not at all what he said
I mean the fallacy that can be constructed as “Hilter ate sugar. Hitler was bad. If you eat sugar, then you must be bad as well.”
Well it's not the intellectual version. Just longer.
My probelm with tradition takes the form of a simple scenario.
Imagine a society in which every individual prioritizes tradtion, it has always emphasized tradition and will always emphasize tradition. Now, how would this society have progressed to discover fire, invent the wheel, make the first computer, agree upon a language?
When you value tradition above all else, scientific progress, racial equality, mathematic achievment, and quality of life, will remain stagnant if not degrade.
I personally think PragerU dances so closely around conclusions without explicitly saying them to instill those conclusions into people in a way that they think they came up with it themselves. Essentially the viewers would think “this conclusion makes sense given what i have seen... it must be the way the world works and i will be more defensive about it because it’s MY idea”
"most of the progress we've made comes from conservative traditions openly skeptical of human reason" i've never been more puzzled by a statement before, now that's a sentence that doesn't make any sense
It's hard to tell if they're intentionally lying or just that misinformed
@@potaterjim oh my lord no I am certain it is intentional.
Despite the recent increase in anti-intellectualism and ass-backwards traditionalism in America, it gives me a little hope knowing that despite the efforts of hardcore Conservatives, human culture (in general) tends to get more open-minded and progressive as time goes on. It's just straight-up unproductive and impractical to keep everything exactly the same forever, with that line of thinking we'd all still be cavemen.
Tyeler Nowell Oh yeah lmao
That's a pretty linear vision of human history... "Progress" is a not easy to define. Some past cultures were more open minded, some were less open minded. Some places today are not open minded, some are.
I think the myth of human progress tend to support way too much capitalism and ecological neglect, i think we should be skeptical about it (even the Marxist vision of a world progressing toward communism).
“Married men go to church more” it’s almost like marriage is a religious institution
Is it just me or is a lot of what they say extremely dangerous. I mean talking about eliminating people's free will to make their own decisions just because of tradition is something out of a horror movie. For people that supposably love America and what makes Americans free, they sure do have a lot of ideas and policies that really restrict freedom.
Their idea of freedom is getting to harass people and face no charges for it, not that you should have the right to be whatever you want
If I were Yoram Hazoney, I would probably return my PhD in Political Philosophy out of sheer embarassment after getting this thoroughly rinsed by some dude on youtube.
If you were Hazony you'd have excised your shame long ago.
He's not just some dude on youtube! He's Big Joel!
"Most of the progress we've made comes from conservative traditions openly skeptical of human reason."
But... aren't traditions inherently opposed to progress? Like, progress is "I don't like the way things are, let's change it" and tradition is "I like the way things are, let's not change it". Even without getting into whether tradition or progress is good, or any other outside point, Prager's statement is a fallacy in and of itself.
“I don’t know, I don’t know I don’t like hitler but He says he’s being rational so let’s just stop thinking then”- that part was so funny
As one person commented in your first Prager U video ever: _"If you drew a graph of the people mad at the French Revolution and the people of Prager U, you would get a perfect circle."_
also weirdly mad at the hatian revolution ... which i never would have heard of it wasn't for conservatives complaining about it XD
Counting bodies like sheep to the rhythm of the war drums.
damn, it almost sounds like they want a monarchy again
The French Revolutionaries invented the Metric system, therefore the Metric system is evil and we must stick with the Standard system.
@@autobotstarscream765 i've only ever heard to it referred to as "the imperial system" which makes it somehow worse XD XD
"Our justice system is good as hell" was an unexpectedly accurate comparison
"Common Sense" translates to "what I know" which translates to "what everyone with any sense knows." It's a substitute for education; more than that, it's a substitute for knowledge.
homsar
I can't believe anyone falls for the propoganda channel that is Prager U, but the sheer amount of young conservatives shows it's working.
"Reasoning is bad, don't think. Just embrace tradition."
Could say the same thing with young marxists, so many of them indoctrinated by youtubers, teachers etc. I would say marxism is ironically a religion, they go that a big company CEO had to "exploit" his workers, even if you prove otherwise that the ceo infact did no exploitation. Most of these young marxists dont even understand the basics of economics, if they did they would stop saying that the CEO is exploiting. It is really sad to see these examples of just following stuff some guy/news network spewed on the internet, this goes for all sides, well what can you do, just hope they grow out of it and come to more reasonable points.
And from my experience these young conservatives and marxists(have seen more marxists show this behavior, but the conservatives are still a ton) are super arrogant and think how smart and better than everybody because they believe in their ideology.
Point me to a single large company that doesn't exploit its workers. You cannot become a large company honestly in this nation.
@@user-nb5uw5ui9i google marxism. I dont think you know what political affiliations are. I think you're trying to say socialists? probably anarcho-libertarians, of which have very little representation if their elected officials are anything to indicate
Ben Trashapiro plays a part in it too. He uses big words, talks fast, and interrupts people whenever he can so obviously he's correct.
The mic hanging only by an xlr cable stresses me out every time
i left this same comment on a video a few months ago lol
There's literally a clip/friction holding it up. Many mics are mounted that way ;)
don't worry, XLR cables have a twisty connector lock like bayonet light bulbs. it's not just friction fit or screwed on
"Logic and reason sucks. Follow tradition instead because it is good!"
"And what methods did you use to measure and analyze this tradition with? How did people reach the conclusion that these traditions are good?"
"We used... faith! Yes, we used faith and faith is good!"
"Alright. How did you measure that then?"
"Our belief demonstrates with good reasoning and logic that-- aw crud."
Big Joel implies the existence of smaller sized Joels
Where is bigger Joel
my completely reaching speculation: could his name be based on "Big Science" by Laurie Anderson???
holy shit
Regular-sized Joel
medium sized joel
i spent a summer as a counselor in training at a summer camp that had been around for almost a hundred years. their position on tradition was that it was a great way to connect with the past, but any tradition that nobody enjoyed wasn't worth being kept around. the happiness and experience of the campers was more important than tradition - current happiness was more important than preserving the past
Reject modernity, embrace tradition! Take care of the earth and tear down all that may hurt her as to avoid her wrath!
I sometimes imagine Dennis Prager and various speakers from pragerU in general, just, like... sitting down and watching a movie like The VVitch, because I think they'd just be nodding their heads at the doctrines/beliefs of the puritanical society and being like "see, that IS where the family went wrong -- their society had the right idea, throwing them out! This is truly a Cautionary Tale for the young women of Today."
Essentially, if the ppl involved in pragerU had their way, they'd end up constructing a romanticized/modern version of what the puritans had. old-timey Salem but with Big Oil. You can marry off your young daughter to a fellow rich old white man AND make another billion dollars off your pipeline construction, ALL in the same day!
...Yikes.
"The best *progress* was made by *conservatives"*
umm what?
I love how PragerU pretends like Hitler wasn't conservative.
Cons love to play out that N@zis had "socialist" in their name. They feel they can get a lot of traction out if that.
But even back when I was a young propagandized con myself, even I could tell the difference between the two.
"I don't think people are willing to just quietly accept that the world they are given is the one they should have" is just common sense. There is a delicious irony to that.
The hatred of the Enlightenment doesn't even make much sense, as many Enlightenment figures WERE religious and would be considered Conservative when put next to modern values.
I think a lot of Conservatives like the Enlightenment and see themselves as conserving it from Progressives, who they believe will lose what progress we've made trying to get any more progress, look up Glenn Beck.
I think mr. Big Joel's transformation into the Albert Einstein look is about 67% complete.
Nevermind, just saw the end credits. Counter reset to 0 ;(
@@tvremote9394 rip
@@tvremote9394 younger einstein!
@@tvremote9394 He looks like dollar store Nikola Tesla.
interesting that he would mention how enlightenment individuals were conservative, *when conservatism was founded in reaction to enlightmentment's ideals of democracy and fairness, seeing it as threat to the established social hierarchy* . i am simplifying of course but that's the general gist of it. it was literally created *because nobels disliked the enlightenment and social reforms* and here he is hundreds of years later claiming credit for it in true conservative fashion.
that is conservative ideology, not nominally conservative opinions by modern standards such as 'tradition and family'.
The phrase "common sense" has always been useless, used by people who don't want to justify their beliefs.
Mr Joel Comma Big is unironically getting me through the month like, hats off m8.
Growing up hearing my parents always listen to Rush Limbaugh, I heard the phrase "common sense" used a lot in places I didn't think it should. I came to the conclusion that it's just a way to avoid actually explaining anything.
I guess I can't complain about some of my favorite youtubers political allegiance.
How's the next BOTW video coming btw?
@@kriegscommissarmccraw4205 Pretty good~
@@KlericYT great! I've used two of your glitches in one of my (Wii-U) runs. Though without motion controls on the switch pro-controllers I've stopped playing.