It's genuinely ironic that Paul, who sells himself as this stalwart principled radical, to whom everyone else is a "radlib", is in actuality an entire order of magnitude closer to the most neutered of a suburbanite wine mom nominal liberal (if not actually much farther to the right than that stereotype) on the topic of confronting raising fascism than he is to the centre-left Wiemar era Iron Front, a mainstream socdem org. Why? Because Paul is a prototype brocialist (defined as "the loser edgelord who saw the light of 'communism' the day Sargon became cringe and Bernie, a moderate socdem with a class reductionist campaign led by Briana Joy Grey and other neo-Strasserite hacks, became mainstream"), to the point of being a self-parody of brocialism. it's all style, no substance. He has no actual values that go deeper than the populist puddle. He's the superficially leftist version of the fedora tipper, which is (sans the "leftism") what he was in 2010 - back then it was "libs LOL" and "feminism evil" and now it's "libs LOL" and "capitalism evil" (he's 50% more morally lucky this time). Back then he thought he discovered manufacturable fusion reactors because he figured out the trivial fact that no god probably exists, and now he thinks he discovered faster than light travel because he figured out that the Iraq war has been a debacle (something even Dick Chaney is probably entirely aware of, and has been so way back when Paul jk'd off to CNN anchorwomen as the video montage of Fallujah dying rolled behind them).
Paul's right to be sarcastic about it. Vaush has been fearmongering over that shit for forever, but anyone who has actually touched grass in the past year knows that he's wrong. Twitter isn't reality, just because all the psychos on there believe the end is nigh, doesn't make it so. The right does enough actual bad in the world that you don't need to make shit up to be concerned over.
It's never been more apparent that Vaush and Paul are from different generations. I'm in Paul's generation. September 11th was my political awakening, I was anti-Iraq War, Patriot Act, etc. Back then getting the Democrats out and starting a new party was a dream, and years later we had a serious shot at that with Bernie Sanders, and it failed. Meanwhile Vaush was about 22 when Trump was elected. All of the stuff Paul thinks of as recent has been his and most of the audience's adulthood, teenager years, or childhood. The Trump term, COVID, the George Floyd protests, the MAGA insurrection -- of COURSE Vaush is more concerned with fascism than Paul! How can Paul not see that these current events are significantly worse than what happened when we were younger? We had 9/11. It was unbelievable for the time. COVID was also unbelievable for the time, and killed more than a million people just on American soil, and left more handicapped, and did far more damage across the world. And while 9/11 brought the country together (largely for the worse) most of those same people denied COVID was even a problem. We had the War on Terror. Well, we're still at war, only now Palestine is virtually gone and we're BACK in Iraq. During Obama's time the Supreme Court got some good things done. Now, we live in time where the Democratic Party screwed up so badly, Roe V Wade is gone and the Supreme Court will be red for a long time. Things are way different than when my generation were younger! You cannot use terms like "neocon" seriously now. Trump is not Bush! Bush was horrible, but Trump has been impeached twice and now he's being investigated for treason, and he STILL likely to win the presidency again! If that doesn't flash neon bright warning signs then you're not absorbing the actual series of events. Catch up, Paul! We're not in our twenties anymore!
"Now, we live in time where the Democratic Party screwed up so badly, Roe V Wade is gone and the Supreme Court will be red for a long time. " Part of the problem is blaming the whole party and calling the result of a rigged game a "mistake" or "screwup". The dems live in a gerrymandered country, from the senate on down. We do not have the fucking luxury of feeding the base with hard core left moves because unlike the GOP who has a built in 3-4 point buffer guarding their right flank. (it takes more middle voters to stay home to impart a loss in a general for a right wing candidate/party than the opposite so they can feed their base more red meat with less risk) the democrats have the opposite problem. Playing to the left scares more votes away than it gains and that reality is played up by the fact our left flank is fucking rife with idiots who do not understand tactical voting so they literally say ignorant shit like these dipshits above when it comes to the idea of maybe holding your goddamned nose and doing the work on voting which mean when the dems DO give us meat we roll our eyes and ask why the server of the meat has to be an old boomer. It isn't dem fuckups which done got us here, it is the founding fathers and their foundational imbalance between rural and urban voting power which provides the GOP the wiggle room they need to constantly fucking be more and more vile but still win elections where the minute a democrat suggests anything the media, voters and whole system punish them for it.
What’s amusing is that Vaush doesn’t even know the full extent of the animosity that Paul has towards him. Since like 2021, Paul has gone on countless long winded rants about Vaush. At this point he has attacked almost every aspect of Vaush’s existence. And Vaush only acknowledges him once every two years or some shit 😂
@@Dr.Spatula to be fair, and vaush noticed at the end, he was wording his argument a little autistically and over explaining himself which was adding to confusion. The argument is simple though; movies are more easily accessible forms of art for most people. For artsy people, that may not be true. But we aren’t the majority of people. Especially music which you literally have to be taught how to listen to in order to have a deep discussion on it. Most people just hear the song, like the beat, and the lyrics. But they don’t care about scales and shit because that’s not accessible to them the way narratives in a movie are.
I really wish it was just an hour of vaush reading comments and answering questions regardless if it's good or bad faith and just insta bans them after reading or answering.
@Southboundpachyderm what about concert, parties, danches, people talking about there top 10s. swiftiess and the bee hive bonding over their idols, or making sweet sweet love ti music
@beo3828 vaush articulated a genuinely bad take here. Not because of the music stuff necessarily but because he arbitrarily elevated movies over music. I couldn't talk about movies in any more depth than music.
@@Luuuma7he didn’t elevate them if anything he put movies down to a lower common standard for enjoyment. And if he did who cares it’s his opinion on media you can’t be wrong about what you don’t like.
I have noticed Vaush has seemed a little more depressive lately, mostly in the way in which he talks about the upcoming 2024 election. However, I still feel like he isnt Doomer. He calls out Bidens dumb shit but he gives us the benefit of the doubt that we're all still going to do our job of voting for him. Being Doomer is believing that nothing can change, where as Vaush is still a firm believer that America's future can be changed by us.
Paul's Ego heard the proverb: "Better to die as a free man, than to live as a slave" and took it personally. He just wants to die "fighting for what he believed in". No resemblance of strategy in his mind. He JUST wants to die.
He doesn't want to die. He just cares more about satisfying his ego in the moment, but best believe, Paul would be shitting his sweatpants if and when he has to face the firing squad.
That's a crazy take. A desire to break our cursed political dichotomy by withholding votes from the "less right wing" party and demanding candidates farther to the left than Hillary or Biden is a strategy. It's a longer term strategy and doesn't focus on individual election cycles. It's a strategy that could get Trump reelected (which may happen anyway), but one that could ultimately force the DNC to be more responsive to their voter base in the long term. The only thing these parties care about more than catering to their big donors is actually winning elections. If political strategists for the dem party find the only way they can continue to win elections is to shift the platform a little farther to the left, they'll likely capitulate. That's the idea anyway... Agree or disagree with that strategy, but don't deny that it is a strategy.
Paul saying Vaush is "babies' first leftist" is honestly hilarious to me as someone who watched him since the Drunken Peasants days as a teen. He was literally just that himself and has been stuck in his ways.
@nathanpapp432 my bad, typo. it is when you listen to it as part of a larger piece, no? And even on its own, it's trying to say something. There are other examples of composed music where is is just a series of rests.
@@bibsp3556 Nah, postmodern music isnt music. That arrhythmic, atonal, "Im writing this with the express purpose of it being nonsensical and unlistenable" stuff isnt music. Its fart-sniffing wankery.
Jimmy Dore in 2016: "What if the moon fell into Lake Michigan?" Paulsego in 2024: "A giant ass could descend from the boundless reaches of space." History doesn't repeat itself, but it often rhymes.
What's weird about Paul is that he used to hate Jimmy Dore because he spat on Alex Jones, then he loved him for grifting and going after the Democrats and then he had to back away from Jimmy Dore when he became an anti-vaxxer.
Vaush's chat have to be fucking plants, surely? Vaush could tell them 4+4=8 and he'd get people in chat going "Oh I see, so you're saying it's not possible for any other combination of numbers to add up to 8? Vaush doesn't get math."
Well the thing is i typically agree with vaush on a lot of things. The music thing is one i genuinely think hes just wrong on. He said outright music isn’t an art and that music cant be as deep as movies can be. I hope it isnt necessary to explain why these are bad points.
@@FishInTheGutter no way he said music isn't art, but he just isn't into music so he'd larp about movies but you can have as deep a convo between music fans as movie fans
@@FishInTheGutter No he literally did not. He said explicitly the exact opposite in this video like a hundred times. I do not know how much clearer it can be made for you.
I don't know why you would bother talking to them about fashion. When you can talk to them about movies. Movies have people wearing clothes in them so you get both at the same time
If ever there is something you are unfamiliar about, sincerely ask them about it, the less you know the better. If they are truly into something, they will be happy and passionate to talk to you about it, and as long as you are open-minded you will have a great, insightful conversation on something you've never paid much attention to. Personally, these people are the most interesting people to talk to as long as you can get them to open up.
Vorsche: Liking music is not a personality trait Chat: So, you're saying people who like music should be interred by brick into the nearest wine cellar. Wow. Take the L.
Fair, but liking films isn’t a personality trait either. And btw, most people who go and watch films also don’t talk about them much unless you’re a bit nerdy about it, so it’s not that different from music. Maybe he just has a very different circle of people around him, but most people I know don’t talk about films or music, they just watch or listen to it and leave it at that.
@jonathanmarkham1998 this right here was my problem with his argument. It's cringe when people talk about music so much it's their personality, it's not cringe or the same with movies....OK buddy Vowsh
@@travdoggiedogg5525 Exactly. I have to admit I have been obnoxious at times in my liking of certain music and I get it but he acts like it’s somehow normal for people to do so about films. If I went on and on about a particular film or its characters and it’s plot, most people would switch off too.
Vaush said you cant talk to people about music the way you can about movies. It was absurd. He obviously has an outsized knowledge of movies enough to hold a conversation on, but entirely dismissed people having similar capabilities with music.
7:30 i think movies are much _easier_ to talk about casually than music or paintings. as a music nerd myself, i can talk about at least some kind of music for hours on end, if im talking to another music nerd. being super-knowledgeable on neither film nor paintings though, i personally find it easier to talk abot the emotional experience of watching a movie than that of looking at a painting, which i would hazard to guess is because watching a movie is a more easily explicable emotional experience. while a film tells a specific story, paintings, or indeed music are (in most cases) much more implicit in their messaging. this is very much a personal outlook though, so please don't be offended by my two cents, commenters.
I disagree slightly. Almost no one I know would watch a film and talk about it, the same as music, but maybe people in general do like talking about films, it’s just not my experience.
Yeah that sounds right, just about anything (especially for artistic subjects) can have a lot of meaningful depth when you're very familiar with the subject. But a movie does have more obvious things to talk about.
Yep, it's easier to talk about a narrative and characters than it is to explain how the chord progression adds to the lyrics, it's really as simple as that
One of my primary interests is music and Vaush is right here, it's so hard to find people who can engage with the very personal experience you had with a song. That does not mean my experience is not that deep, but it does mean that my experience is personal
Yeah, of the friends I have who do the "listening to albums as a communal activity" thing, they're all musicians, some full on conservatory educated. The only time I've hung out with people who weren't musicians where the activity turned into just listening to an album, everyone was high. Hot take, I think a lot of the same ppl who got rustled over this take were the same who got rustled over his weed takes. It's giving "I still have a mandala tapestry I bought at east meets west hanging in my apartment "
Paulsego saying the thing about the ass falling from the sky reminds me viscerally of Jimmy Dore saying “the moon might fall from the sky” to Sam Seder with regards to the Supreme Court turning conservative and Roe going away. Edit: I posted this comment then unpaused the video and the same thing got said like 2 seconds later lol.
@@jonathanmarkham1998as a musician, no they absolutely do not. They can tell you how it makes them feel, but like the original post said, that's about it. Ask someone about Oppenheimer and you'll get some opinions and discussion about the narrative and characters and how this shot worked so well, etc. Ask them what they think about Drake and all you'll get is, "he's good, I liked his older stuff better. Fell off around here." Little discussion about the content of the songs, just whether or not they enjoyed it. That's the difference, we're better equipped to discuss narratives than we are more emotional experiences like music or paintings because of how our brains process time and personal interactions. Doesn't mean you can't talk in depth about it, just that way fewer people will
@@drpepperman2765 That’s nonsense. I went and watched Oppenheimer with a couple of people and I remember them saying afterwards that it was decent. That was it. No intention of having some conversation about the plot or anything else about the film. I agree with you about music, but I think most people would be the same about films as well. If you’re around people that like to talk about either medium, you’re already in a niche. Often times music can be very narrative driven as well.
Vaush needs to find a way to just say "Yeah, I couldn't engage with someone on X hobby because I'm not interested in X hobby". It would save him so much trouble.
no he wants to be objectively right about it though. so much so that he ends up just saying something obvious as fuck like "movies have more going on than music" no shit how is that platitude useful to anybody?
@@thevotemanvery ironic of him being Mr. Utilitarian and then wasting half the video rambling about the most insignificant bullshit possible. You’re not as into music as everyone else so cool
My interpretation of what Vaush was saying is that on average people are not able to dig deep into music compared to movies because of the amount of content provided. Its not, I am not interested but more so less content for the average consumer to engage with. If I saw music as a hobby in a dating profile all i can really go with is you like x song or band and thats about it but with a movie I am more likely to be able to converse about messaging, quality, the actors, or something like that as someone who isn't deep into movies or songs.
Forreal man seeing him go from the hilarious fan favorite from the early days of Drunken peasants to the eternally pessimistic grouch he is now is sad as fuck
He's like that friend who keeps saying and doing stupid shit and no matter how much you talk with him and tell him he needs to act mature, it just goes in one ear and out the other.
I recall him saying something like, "This is me, I'm not gonna change." So there's that and the fact that he talks down at young people for allegedly not knowing as much he does. These qualities are of someone who's set in their own ways and are not interested in growing. He's a narcissist.
Yes, he forgets that people can get dumber or more bitter with age. Seems like he feels more wise because his in his 40s, sometimes it's the other way around MY GUY, MY DUDE. A thought I had recently: I actually don't remember the last time I've heard a person be like 'hey I got it wrong, I was wrong about that' just saying those words once in while would be nice. People aren't brave enough to admit their failure and its very sad. They never self reflect, they don't apologise sincerely, its always a forced apology that means nothing. I blame the internet cause its such an ego inflater. 😢 I miss people just being people with flaws, as opposed to being a machine that thinks its always correct. All of those podcasts and Internet shows aren't genuine, and I feel like giving up on them.
Scotty being reasonable compared to the other two just makes me think there’s a reason why he was awfully silent during their last convo (seriously, he had like 4 sentences in there). He was listening, and agreeing silently
Vaush commonly frames things as bluntly and as like.. contrarian-ly as possible to his audience or whoever he's talking to, then is surprised when people interpret him uncharitably lol. Just dropping "I dont' like when people have 'I like music' in their profile" and "The only people worth your time are liberals" and then acting like OMG how could anyone find this disagreeable or react negatively to me saying this... like lol. Those statements aren't wrong at all, but I do feel like he is being disingenuous by acting like he's surprised those statements cause double takes. Of course he *does* add nuance to those statements, but it's just not enough for a voice on the internet. Like, the balance and the timing is off. It's like he'll say "puppies make me sad" and then be like "how can you disagree that dog breeds with highly mutated flat faces are doomed to live uncomfortable difficult lives? Are you not sad knowing a pug puppy will struggle to breath all its life??" lol. I'M EXAGGERATING but yea
I feel like his take on weed use is frustrating, because I know he probably understands the benefits it has, even for frequent users. But he talks like he holds weed users in contempt which is really strange considering he takes adderall. Weed is often prescribed by doctors and I use it for clinical depression so hearing him talk like that makes me respect him less or at least want to actually know what he really believes. If he has made some kind of statement about it I have missed it, and I cant be expected to watch all of his content. A lot of people really are being bad faith though, the community in his subreddits are the same way. That's completely true. He is stubbornly refusing to have tact sometimes I think and I agree he must know what reaction he is going to get. Maybe it gets him views.
@@Dante3214 Yeah, I think his weed takes are also influenced by that overexaggeration I was talking about, bc from all I've heard him say, it sounds like he is just super annoyed by people who make weed their whole personality.. but then he'll express that by saying 'i dont like weed' and then people are like ?? and then he doubles down and is like 'obvs i dont have a problem with weed it's this more specific thing' lol.
... This comment punched me in the jaw from the shadows, then helped me to my feet with the knowledge that I'm not the only one jacking up their water bill by spending an hour yelling at an imaginary Bill Maher or something. (Fuckin hate that guy btw)
I feel kinda bad for Paulsego he's basically a manifestation of the pure essence of someone having given up on anything getting better... and it's also become his job. How sad is that.
@@TheDoomSheep it’s not about him not being able to do autistic rizz with it. It’s about him saying that music is essentially a worse conversational topic than movies because movies include music and is more multi-layered, completely missing the fact that most music that’s included in films is usually meant to be in the background and therefore doesn’t really encompass all of the things you can discuss about actual songs such as lyrics, arrangement, instruments used, the performances on each of them, production, history behind it’s conception, the live performances, the audience and critical reception to it, when you usually listen to it and what it means to you. There’s really tons of things you can discuss about music, it’s an incredibly multi-layered artform and still just because Vaush doesn’t have as deep of a connection with it he thinks it’s less interesting in general.
@@thegoalistheplan3868 Oh, for sure music is worse than movies as conversational centrepieces. Just think about it. When you're a movie fan, you can talk about movies for ages. But music? All you get is reeeeee. Totally unfulfilling. Absolutely unfulfilling twaddle. Let's move on.
I think the issue is the lack of distinction in what "conversation" can mean. I cannot have a light casual conversation about music that teaches anyone anything about me or my opinions there's just not enough information in musical small-talk the way there is in cinema-small-talk. The experience with music is so personal and internal that having a conversation about it requires a level of intimacy and comfort that is really hard to reach for with a person you're not already ultra comfortable with. Movies though? There's so many different things to focus on when it comes to talking about movies that you can have a comfortable, casual conversation that helps create that emotional intimacy that you need to have the more vulnerable conversations with music.@@phillipsiebold8351 (I don't know if this is how ~he~ feels about it to be fair, but this is my feelings on it which seem pretty inline with his words, and also my personal experience.)
I remember a few years ago Paul's Ego saying something about how Republicans were just posturing about getting Roe v. Wade overturned to garner political points, and Democrats were just posturing about codifying it so they garnered political points. At the time, I almost lent him some credence to that idea. Cynical politics. But today, with Roe v. wade actually gone and other rights coming up on the chopping block, it's clear who the actual cynic in the room is, and it's frustrating to see him so willfully deny the reality of the threat the Republicans pose. It's the story of Charybdis and Scylla, but instead of choosing the lesser of two dangerous paths and saving the ship and most of its crew, it's choosing neither and getting destroyed by Charybdis. It's truly one of the most vile forms of leftism that I've ever encountered. Not just because it's nihilistic and sad, but because it implicitly discourages people to use what little power they have to swing things in a relatively more positive direction.
Guys, I prefer a music date, but I can acknowledge that movies are a far easier social activity for most people. Hes saying nothing about the ability to enjoy or discuss these things, only how well it works for socializing and dating. I honestly cant believe just how entirely unwilling any of you were to even try to understand his point. It wasn't a complicated or controversial point. In fact its one youd all agree with if you allowed yourselves to hear it.
"Tucker Carlson is a Traditional Neo-Con" Remember that watch in Godzilla that stopped in time when the nuke dropped? That's what happened to PaulsEgo on 9/11
I can also understand chat's frustration. One minute he's talking about how much/little you can unpack in a conversation about music, next minute his argument shifts to saying you can't really experience music with people like you can with movies. He probably has a good argument somewhere, he just needs to explain it better
Some chatters made legitimate points. Those were the first he banned. Some also got things wrong but not in an unreasonable manner for the most part. He communicated pretty poorly. And people saying he did a motte and bailey aren't exactly wrong. The original thing he said was that he dislikes people who put "I like music" in their bio because you can't really talk about it. Then he gets mad and pretends people who challenge him on this with the obvious point plenty of people can. You can call it "adding nuance" and "people jumping to conclusions" but it's really. When you make absolute statements and then add a bunch of qualifiers later thats not people being "intentionally dense" when they challenge you on the original absolute statement. Most of the time Vaush actually gets ban happy is because people challenge him with legitimate points or he just communicated very poorly.
Thanks to watching Vaush, I have joined the Greens party (in my country) and I now participate in writing public submissions. If I had watched Paulsego, I probably would have stayed in bed waiting for the world to end.
I was ready to laugh at the DFF dudes, but the music diatribe there at the beginning kind of got me a little. I like Vaush, but some of his non-political takes are just baffling to me lately, and his tendency to insist that people aren't listening to him while psychoanalyzing and banning is just... cringe and weird.
Bit silly to get offended over it. He’s just some guy. I do agree though. He seems to be very stubborn but anyone who’s watched him for a while knew that anyway tbf.
Because he thinks he can debate his way out of any bad take instead of engaging directly with the critique of his take. I try my best to avoid Vaush talking about culture of any kind.
I dunno, I find incredibly subjective snap banning hilarious. People have subjective opinions on media and none of them are wrong or right. It literally doesn't matter what Vaush thinks about music or art in general. He's not wrong, neither is anyone else. I was watching somebody unironically defend Nickleback the other day. I don't understand that position at all and think its stupid but eh...I also don't understand why people watch reality TV. Media opinions of others literally don't matter.
@@cmcneil726 Yeah, I thought it was just a fun meme that his culture takes were bad but.... man, it really feels like he somehow misses the mark 100% of the time. And not only that, he always needs to insist that his take is objectively correct and get really worked up about it.
Yes, you can have interesting and in depth conversations about music. Yes, people who only list liking music on a dating profile is pretty much exactly the same as saying they “like to travel” or “like to eat”, in that it doesn’t give you much to work with
The average person with no specific interest in music or movies will have an easier time engaging with and holding a conversation about a movie than a song/album. Obviously, musicians/audiophiles will get more out of sitting and listening to a song. Vaush's point is that's harder to do with a random person or normie for an extended period of time than sitting and watching a movie.
Paul is demonstrating a classical example of someone who's engaging in the "Inescapable Trial and Error Fallacy" Short definition: The "Inescapable Trial and Error Fallacy" refers to a logical error where one assumes that because a solution has not been found through trial and error, no solution exists, without considering other possible methods or factors that could lead to a solution. It essentially overlooks alternative approaches or avenues for solving a problem beyond the ones attempted.
I absolutely loved the drug video TJ posted. It was genuinely hilarious to watch how stupid they are. “You drink coffee and drink alcohol occasionally… therefore you’re exactly like someone who’s addicted to heroin.”
@@NikoNikolaia Anyone reading this, please pay very close attention to the cheap rhetorical trick the person I'm replying to is trying to pull. So what are they doing, exactly? They're asking an intentionally vague question about a lengthy discission, in the hope that the fact no one will _bother_ to bring them up to speed from scratch will make it look like no one is _able_ to. But TubaInferno , if you're actually committed to the charade, you can just specify a timestamp from the conversation, and we can discuss who's right about what.
@@eye-chan1711the tj drug video was pretty reasonable. it is wrong of vaush to ascribe the adjective "untrustworthy" to a person because of habitual drug use. when confronted on this, all vaush does is go "OH SO DO YOU THINK THAT SOMEONE HIGH ON WEED 24/7 IS THE APEX OF LUCIDITY????"
@@hadronoftheseus8829 So what's wrong with getting some form of clarification? Do they mean right in perspective to their opinion or like the means that they are objectively right?
What’s interesting is that I first learned of Vaush FROM Paulsego. I watched/listened to their talk around the height of George Floyd in May/June of 2020. It was a pretty good conversation and I’ve been a bigger Vaush fan than the DFF boys since. I do enjoy the three, but similar to Hasan, they have notable flaws.
Come from a family of musicians, and I love music. That said, I'm also friends with a geotech engineer who could spend far longer talking about soil than my dad could about music, because anything can be interesting and have depth. The difference between music and movies is to have a discussion about a song, you need to be interested in the song. Whereas for a movie, being interested in it could involve being interested in any of the songs, or the visual components as well. That's not to say movies have more depth to them, or that movies are more interesting. Far from it. It's just that if you're going to talk to a random person about something, and you two don't know what your common interests are, chances are much higher to find something in a movie than in a song.
Surface level conversation about a movie: "That was a nice movie. I liked it when Ding Dong used the thingy to do that thingy. I thought it was a funny scene." - "Oh right. Yes, I felt like that was funny too. I also liked the sad moment." Surface level conversation about a song: "This song slaps. I like the rhythm." - "Yes."
It's so weird how Vaush can't just say "I personally find more inspiration for conversation from movies and video games compared to music." No, apparently he needs to claim something inherent about these art forms makes them easier to talk about in the broadest sense. When an artform has fewer overlapping elements, it often forces the audience to engage with the elements that are there on a deeper level, which is ripe for conversation. He probably realized this was a bad argument, which is why he pretended like his argument was about narratives the whole time. Vaush dumb
Its gonna be so funny to see the follow up to the follow up because that will mean the deep fat boys will have to wade through nearly a half hour of vaush yelling at chat over music.
Vaush's take on music is so insanely myopic Edit: well after the whole rant his position is perfectly reasonable. Idk how he initially expressed it but it was probably in a way that invites misunderstanding lol
Yeah thats the problem. After. His initial take was dumb and he got mad at people rightly challenging it. Then he adds a dozen qualifiers and pretends that was totally his actual point and people were just being "intentionally dense". Ridiculous. I am just glad he rarely treats politics like this.
I'd say the reason is the numerous mediums involved in filmmaking are like casting a net. If you and your buddies watch s movie one of you can comment on production design, someone else on music and s third one will talk about writing but you all watched the same thing. That's actually what I love about discussing cinema.
What Vaush actually said originally: Putting an interest in music in your dating bio is stupid and you can't really have a good conversation about it. What some people actually said in response: I had great conversations with dates so this seems kinda ridiculous. Then he starts banning people. And *then* he adds a bunch of qualifiers and pretends it's other peoples fault they didn't magically get that he actually has a much more nuanced position than the absolute statement he originally made.
Music snobs who can't put themselves in the mindset of somebody who doesn't have the same tastes in music are insufferable. I like music, but I have major gaps in certain genres, and whoooo boy did one of my coworkers not know how to handle that. Like, he would name drop several '70s punk bands and such, and I would awkwardly have to admit I know nothing about these bands, and he would just sit there, thinking less of me. There was no attempt to share his enthusiasm for these bands -- he just wanted to feel superior.
Contrast this with a friend who is into music theory. Plays the cello. Taught himself bass guitar. His favorite piece of classical music is Ravel's Daphnis and Chloe. I had heard it before, but it had never clicked. Then one night while hanging out, he put it on, and explained what was going on with harmonies and different instruments. His nerdy energy was infectious. There was no condescension, just pure joy. And now I am a Daphnis and Chloe fan.
Dealing with people like Paul in HS and early on my navy job unironically was the driving force of my neoliberal/neoconservative phase. I've moved on since then
A small point: 6:23 "You can't listen to music together with a person and have the same kind of extensive conversations or opinions on it the way you can with a movie because [...] a movie has more overlapping elements to engage with than music--obviously: movies contain music plus other things." There's no steelman for this statement it's simply ignorant. The end there, that movies "contain music," presupposes that music in isolation is at all comparable to music as a constituent of a movie. It's the idea that music is just sensational, that you simply hear music and it sounds nice or bad or neutral, that it couldn't have any meaning. It's not even wrong, like someone saying, "An image looks good or bad or meh. Who cares if an AI made it? An image is just an image." I believe this is ignorance of music as an art form that is equivalent to "AI artists" insisting that there can be no deeper meaning in images. Edit: I forgot how long this segment goes on about music. About 18:03 he says this isn't about music knowledge and I agree; this isn't about music knowledge specifically, it's about art knowledge generally. I want to clarify that I believe he believes two songs in isolation is "less than" the same two songs if they were in a movie. There's less content or less to unpack because, literally, the whole songs are in the movie. I believe he believes that. I argue that that's missing a point that there can be "more" to the songs in isolation versus appearing in the movie. "More" not being literally more content, but other, separate meaning that could be absent in the film. This separate meaning can be artistic in narrative and/or non-narrative ways, and this can warrant analysis and discussion that wouldn't apply to their appearance in the film. It feels like I would need to show an example to make this point heuristically...
I mean small since his ideas aren't consequential because it's just about a personal perception of art. I do care about it because I care a lot about art, though.
My only exposure to the DSA was I saw some at a Palestinian protest and they came by my neighborhood to petition abortion on the ballot (I live in the south)
One thing I really respect about voosh is his separation of reality and online leftism. He’s fully aware of the limits we work in as leftist. Vaush is effective and netizens hate it lol
"listening to music and looking at paintings isn't a social thing that you can share and talk to someone about in depth" ...has he seriously never been to a concert or an art museum with friends or a date or whatever? i've talked to people about music and paintings for hours, vawsh is just straight up wrong here, thinking his disinterest and ignorance when it comes to music means it objectively isn't engaging
And yet Paul is saying that Vaush said music lovers should be shot you can call him ignorant which is fine multiple music majors are both agreeing and dissagreeing and yet somehow Paul is still insane
He means it as in for everyone in general. If you go on a blind date with someone and get to pick 1 thing to spend the afternoon with, without knowing anything about the other person, going to watch the movies is the safest option, as it has a narrative structure that is universal to human. If the other person has different age, passion, creed, religion, ... chances are that watching movies is safe bet that you come out of the afternoon having something to break the ice. Looking at paintings and music should be after you get to know the other person a little bit, knowing their interest. Having said that you absolutely can talk about those two immediately, but it is much restricted. If you meet someone in a concert, chances are that you will be able to immediately talk about music, but this is a more specific circumstance.
Going to a concert and listening to music are totally different experiences... His whole point is almost entirely centered around dates, especially first dates. If you take two random pairs going on a first date, one watches a movie that neither person has seen, the other listens to an album neither of them have listened to, do you really think chances are good that both pairs will have the same amount to talk about? Now if instead of just listening to the music they went to a concert to hear it, yeah I'd agree. Because the concert isn't just the music. There's the lines, the crowds, the smells, the food, plus whatever is visually happening on stage. What's the time stamp for your quote btw? I don't remember it but he might have said it, but it's also clearly not an actual summary of his position.
7:09 what if someone said they enjoyed reading? could you engage with that? the problem isn't with music as an interest, the problem is you're musically illiterate. you're getting better about it though, your music takes 4 years ago almost radicalized me to the far right istg but yeah music is a form of communication in the same way as fashion. and just like you had to with fashion, you have to learn how to appreciate and talk about music.
Vaush's confidence is a double edged sword. In one hand he really transmits confidence in progressive ideas and that brings people over. On the other hand he is way too comfortable giving his opinions as if they were facts on topics he isn't well versed in. That, in turn, can make people question his politics takes.
The problem is Vaush is on the spectrum and magically forgets about it. He never sat down to consume and talk about music with someone because hasn't gotten his dick wet with Tindussy.
He did specfically address this point tho. Books have a narrative, which is easier for the everyman to engage in discussion about as opposed to music, where you need a certain degree of expertise to have a decent conversation about it.
Nah he's entirely correct. It's alot easier to have only a passing interest in a movie while still being able to discuss it vs having the same interest in a song. Saying you "like" music is just a vague and worthless as saying you drink water
As someone whose perfect first date with their long-time partner was going to an art museum and staring at art for a while, I'd like to say that that date probably only worked because I am an artist and they are an art historian. (and we still do movies as a date more often than museums.) The idea of just listening to music as a date being on par with movies is laughable unless you are pretty serious musicians. I feel like it's pretty obvious that there is just wayyy more to engage with in movies even if it isn't your field. Not to say folks shouldn't be putting on an album and enjoying it with their partners from time to time, but it's clearly different
That music take will always be bad, and it's so crazy how you default to calling people who disagree with you bad faith. It think it's pretty bad faith to be bad at communicating your point, get emotional when people disagree, and then just call them bad faith to avoid the discussion.
I think there’s a decent point layered into the music argument, but the argument Vaush is making here is broader than the legitimate argument. I think the argument you could actually make is roughly that movies are easier to engage with, when what Vaush said is “film is more layered than music,” which is absurd
@@williamchamberlain2263 if you want to sit here and claim that Ace Ventura or Jack and Jill has more layers than something like the Rite of Spring, I can’t help you. The concept of quantifying how many layers a work of art has completely misunderstands what art is. There is absolutely music that’s more complex than some movies. You could identify a trend that film *typically* is more complex than music. But saying it as a rule rather than a trend is patently absurd.
Chat thinking vaush is saying music is worse than movies when he’s actually saying most people don’t have the skills to dissect music the way they could dissect a movie says a lot about chat.
One thing i am very confident in is that socialism cannot be achieved top down. Even if there was a communist president it probably wouldn't achieve much without an amount of grassroots support for socialism that does not exist today.
I defended you in the comments of onion nuggets channel Vaush. But Paul has valid criticism in regards to defending status quo demoocrats and lesser evil voting being a problem for catalyzing real substantial change in politics.
I actually kinda agree with Vaush that movies have more layers than music - cuz it's MULTImedia...but generally curious what he thinks about movies/tv/film vs. VIDEOGAMES as a primary conversation center. Would movies still be the best talking point? Cuz you could argue videogames have the most amount of layers.
Just the fact that the only right-wing media personality he keeps naming is Rush Limbaugh shows how out of touch Paul is. And calling the modern right-wing neocons lol TUCKER CARLESON
As someone who isn't THAT invested in music I feel like you can definitely discuss songs and albums/compare and constrast different artists in very much the same way you can with movies. And the same goes for paintings. You can definitely get lost in conversations about the artistic technique, cultural implications, and history associated with paintings. Those conversations just aren't interesting to Vaush and that's fine but it doesn't mean they don't exist.
theres literally like podcasts where you can watch people talk about an album together for hours on youtube lol, like vaush is just being purposefully ignorant about this for some reason
I can't tell the difference between 2 hours of plot and dialogue and the narrative infused in a piece of music because the pieces of music I listen to are two hours long.
I agree with Vaush's music take. Music is so hard to talk about that's why we dance to it. We literally invented another art form in order to express how we feel about it
I had to stop watching this ten minutes in. What I THOUGHT Vaush was trying to say was that HE didn't find as many layers in music and so he wouldn't want to date anyone if that was their primary interest because he wouldn't be able to talk about that subject for extended periods of time. But then, after everyone he banned was bringing up their opinions depth of interest/talking. He says. "Music just doesn't have as many layers as movies, that's an objective opinion." No. It's not. For it to be objective there has to be concrete variables. Tell me about the layers. Quantify the layers of which you can talk about a movie vs music. My boyfriend plays several instruments, and I went to film school. We have just as deep and layered conversations on each subject. I was just starting to come back to this community after having to leave for a while because everything got so negative. I've done a lot of work on myself and I just can't watch or support someone who is this mean and insists he is objectively correct on something subjective. This was really deeply upsetting. Vaush is just wrong about this. 100% wrong. It's okay if you don't have a lot to talk about on a subject. That doesn't mean the subject has no depth. God this is just so sad.
What do you mean by starting to come back to this community? He’s just a guy, it’s not that deep. I do agree though, he’s quite ignorant on this one and I think he is wilfully to some extent.
Ok on the music point, it reminds me of when people put down "Food" as one of their interests on dating apps and it's like??? What do you like eating it? Seeing it? Cooking? Baking? It gives you nothing to work off lol
you earn the people being defensive when you go about "Mah Subjectivity" for art, people will be bad faith if you try to be Objective, the same way you are conveniently allergic to Objectivity when your feelings are involved.
I was a classical musician for over a decade and went on dates with other musicians. It’s very hard to carry out a conversation about music with a layperson, mostly due to music theory not being a common area of knowledge for most people. As for discussing music with other musicians, that can last for hours lol.
You can tell how disingenuous a conversation is based on how a person will hear a statement and discuss it while intentionally ignoring the explanation that came immediately after... almost like chat when it came to the music comment🤔🤔🤔
Your and Vaush's parasocial treatment of chat as some sort of hivemind is just weird. Also "the explanation that came after" wasn't really an explanation of the original statement. It was a bunch of new qualifiers. Some of which completely contradict the original one. It's why one chatter accused him of motte and bailey. Because it kinda was.
20:22 this is actually why i love MF DOOMs story telling, he creates interesting narratives and characters that are easy to engage with while creating an excellent wall of sound whether its with the help of a collaborater or his solo work. Ita important to involve "multimedia" elements into any form of art to create an engaging dialog And i also think thats why sampling (when its done well) hits a certain way to so many people becuase it involves a lot of media we all can engage with externally My favorite examples are sci fi food recipes lol
I would literally steal from my parents for weed money. I still smoke but I'm in a much healthier place now and it's very evident to me that most of the people angry about Vaush's take is just really insecure and worried they may also be dependent on this substance. I think Keffals (an ex coke addict) made a pretty good defense of Vaush's take.
It's not the disagreement, it's that people seem to go out of their way to misinterpret things he says in the worst possible way. They take the lightest criticisms of their hobbies as personal attacks.
"Vote Democrat." Rush Limbaugh was always saying this.
I'm just laughing my a** off about the "probably an autism thing.... probably... but still banned."
The ban rampage was uncalled for but pretty hilarious nonetheless
@@KoewlBag "don't care, banned"
A joker huh?@@Samtar banned.
fully serious? you won't believe it, @@zaodedong9935 also banned
@@zaodedong9935 laughing at others expense huh? BANNED
The sarcastic “Oh because fascism is just around the corner my dudes!” comment from Paul was such a Weimar moment, jfc
"we must learn history to not repeat it"-liberals when we start actually repeating the bad history
The material conditions my guy.
"Pragmatism my guy"
It's genuinely ironic that Paul, who sells himself as this stalwart principled radical, to whom everyone else is a "radlib", is in actuality an entire order of magnitude closer to the most neutered of a suburbanite wine mom nominal liberal (if not actually much farther to the right than that stereotype) on the topic of confronting raising fascism than he is to the centre-left Wiemar era Iron Front, a mainstream socdem org.
Why? Because Paul is a prototype brocialist (defined as "the loser edgelord who saw the light of 'communism' the day Sargon became cringe and Bernie, a moderate socdem with a class reductionist campaign led by Briana Joy Grey and other neo-Strasserite hacks, became mainstream"), to the point of being a self-parody of brocialism. it's all style, no substance. He has no actual values that go deeper than the populist puddle.
He's the superficially leftist version of the fedora tipper, which is (sans the "leftism") what he was in 2010 - back then it was "libs LOL" and "feminism evil" and now it's "libs LOL" and "capitalism evil" (he's 50% more morally lucky this time). Back then he thought he discovered manufacturable fusion reactors because he figured out the trivial fact that no god probably exists, and now he thinks he discovered faster than light travel because he figured out that the Iraq war has been a debacle (something even Dick Chaney is probably entirely aware of, and has been so way back when Paul jk'd off to CNN anchorwomen as the video montage of Fallujah dying rolled behind them).
Paul's right to be sarcastic about it. Vaush has been fearmongering over that shit for forever, but anyone who has actually touched grass in the past year knows that he's wrong. Twitter isn't reality, just because all the psychos on there believe the end is nigh, doesn't make it so. The right does enough actual bad in the world that you don't need to make shit up to be concerned over.
It's never been more apparent that Vaush and Paul are from different generations. I'm in Paul's generation. September 11th was my political awakening, I was anti-Iraq War, Patriot Act, etc. Back then getting the Democrats out and starting a new party was a dream, and years later we had a serious shot at that with Bernie Sanders, and it failed. Meanwhile Vaush was about 22 when Trump was elected. All of the stuff Paul thinks of as recent has been his and most of the audience's adulthood, teenager years, or childhood. The Trump term, COVID, the George Floyd protests, the MAGA insurrection -- of COURSE Vaush is more concerned with fascism than Paul! How can Paul not see that these current events are significantly worse than what happened when we were younger? We had 9/11. It was unbelievable for the time. COVID was also unbelievable for the time, and killed more than a million people just on American soil, and left more handicapped, and did far more damage across the world. And while 9/11 brought the country together (largely for the worse) most of those same people denied COVID was even a problem. We had the War on Terror. Well, we're still at war, only now Palestine is virtually gone and we're BACK in Iraq. During Obama's time the Supreme Court got some good things done. Now, we live in time where the Democratic Party screwed up so badly, Roe V Wade is gone and the Supreme Court will be red for a long time. Things are way different than when my generation were younger! You cannot use terms like "neocon" seriously now. Trump is not Bush! Bush was horrible, but Trump has been impeached twice and now he's being investigated for treason, and he STILL likely to win the presidency again! If that doesn't flash neon bright warning signs then you're not absorbing the actual series of events. Catch up, Paul! We're not in our twenties anymore!
Yep, dude is stuck in the mid to late 2000s.
Well fucking said.
Very well put.
Vaush is too young to remember that Democrat owned media signal boosted Trump over all other Republican candidates.
"Now, we live in time where the Democratic Party screwed up so badly, Roe V Wade is gone and the Supreme Court will be red for a long time. "
Part of the problem is blaming the whole party and calling the result of a rigged game a "mistake" or "screwup". The dems live in a gerrymandered country, from the senate on down. We do not have the fucking luxury of feeding the base with hard core left moves because unlike the GOP who has a built in 3-4 point buffer guarding their right flank. (it takes more middle voters to stay home to impart a loss in a general for a right wing candidate/party than the opposite so they can feed their base more red meat with less risk) the democrats have the opposite problem.
Playing to the left scares more votes away than it gains and that reality is played up by the fact our left flank is fucking rife with idiots who do not understand tactical voting so they literally say ignorant shit like these dipshits above when it comes to the idea of maybe holding your goddamned nose and doing the work on voting which mean when the dems DO give us meat we roll our eyes and ask why the server of the meat has to be an old boomer.
It isn't dem fuckups which done got us here, it is the founding fathers and their foundational imbalance between rural and urban voting power which provides the GOP the wiggle room they need to constantly fucking be more and more vile but still win elections where the minute a democrat suggests anything the media, voters and whole system punish them for it.
music argument ends at 30:48
I can stop watching at 30:00, got it.
You're a fucking hero. Thank you.
Thank you 🙏🏻
you are a saint
Omg thank god
What’s amusing is that Vaush doesn’t even know the full extent of the animosity that Paul has towards him. Since like 2021, Paul has gone on countless long winded rants about Vaush. At this point he has attacked almost every aspect of Vaush’s existence. And Vaush only acknowledges him once every two years or some shit 😂
Jesus christ. Paul will use his dying breath to say Vowsh bad.
I’ve had to step back from their content since the most recent Vaush debate. They (mostly Paul) are so fixated on Vaush it’s annoying
It's because he embarrassed Paul that first talk they had and Paul stewed on it for years .
It is really weird that when people don't like vaush it often becomes a huge part of their personality.
@@andrewgreenwood9068 VDS is real
Love drama it's my favorite
Nevermind, spending the first HALF HOUR arguing with chat about unrelated bullshit is my favorite
25 minutes* lol
Turns out the argument with chat was the perfect preface for how comments can be intentionally misinterpreted and context ignored
@@Dr.Spatula to be fair, and vaush noticed at the end, he was wording his argument a little autistically and over explaining himself which was adding to confusion. The argument is simple though; movies are more easily accessible forms of art for most people. For artsy people, that may not be true. But we aren’t the majority of people. Especially music which you literally have to be taught how to listen to in order to have a deep discussion on it. Most people just hear the song, like the beat, and the lyrics. But they don’t care about scales and shit because that’s not accessible to them the way narratives in a movie are.
I really wish it was just an hour of vaush reading comments and answering questions regardless if it's good or bad faith and just insta bans them after reading or answering.
@Southboundpachyderm what about concert, parties, danches, people talking about there top 10s. swiftiess and the bee hive bonding over their idols, or making sweet sweet love ti music
HALF of this video is a stunlock, editors why have you forsaken us?
Especially when Vaush said "that's it's own segment wrap it up"
A really fucking stupid 30 minutes where chat and Vaush attempt to say something stupider than the other the entire time
3 things that bring out the Salt in Paul:
1. IKEA
2. Street Fighter
3. Disagreeing with Vonsch
4. Any pushback from chat
@@zaodedong9935to be fair voosh doesn't always handle that well either
Don't forget regretting supporting the Iraq war in his twenties. That would follow me around too.
@@lucascarroll4859 that is true. It's something they have in common. 🤣
I've been doing a backwards hadouken since 1992. Salty Paul round as a ball.
By the way, we aren't getting off the music tangent until 30:46.
*yes, seriously.*
Doing the Lord's work 😆
Honestly he should ban them for longer, that would shut the trolls up.
@beo3828 vaush articulated a genuinely bad take here. Not because of the music stuff necessarily but because he arbitrarily elevated movies over music. I couldn't talk about movies in any more depth than music.
@@Luuuma7 which is not the point.
I will not dispute how badly he dealt with it (very badly, yeah).
@@Luuuma7he didn’t elevate them if anything he put movies down to a lower common standard for enjoyment.
And if he did who cares it’s his opinion on media you can’t be wrong about what you don’t like.
I have noticed Vaush has seemed a little more depressive lately, mostly in the way in which he talks about the upcoming 2024 election. However, I still feel like he isnt Doomer. He calls out Bidens dumb shit but he gives us the benefit of the doubt that we're all still going to do our job of voting for him. Being Doomer is believing that nothing can change, where as Vaush is still a firm believer that America's future can be changed by us.
I mean. We gotta have hope for the future. Otherwise, why do we try, right?
So much harder to justify voting for him now than it was four years ago, and yet somehow, still so easy.
That’s called being delusional
@@Darkloid21so you are the Doomer not Vaush good to know
I'd say its a realization that change isn't going to happen in our lifetime atleast not in a time frame that we get to enjoy the benefits of it
Paul's Ego heard the proverb: "Better to die as a free man, than to live as a slave" and took it personally.
He just wants to die "fighting for what he believed in". No resemblance of strategy in his mind. He JUST wants to die.
He doesn't want to die. He just cares more about satisfying his ego in the moment, but best believe, Paul would be shitting his sweatpants if and when he has to face the firing squad.
That implies he is puts himself on the front line, he isnt.
That's a crazy take. A desire to break our cursed political dichotomy by withholding votes from the "less right wing" party and demanding candidates farther to the left than Hillary or Biden is a strategy. It's a longer term strategy and doesn't focus on individual election cycles. It's a strategy that could get Trump reelected (which may happen anyway), but one that could ultimately force the DNC to be more responsive to their voter base in the long term. The only thing these parties care about more than catering to their big donors is actually winning elections. If political strategists for the dem party find the only way they can continue to win elections is to shift the platform a little farther to the left, they'll likely capitulate. That's the idea anyway... Agree or disagree with that strategy, but don't deny that it is a strategy.
Jreg comes to mind😅
@@notavailable6460 Good point.
Paul saying Vaush is "babies' first leftist" is honestly hilarious to me as someone who watched him since the Drunken Peasants days as a teen. He was literally just that himself and has been stuck in his ways.
Paul is mad that Vaush is the successful version of himself.
Vaush is to Paul as TJ is to Brett.
same
Same
@@paulisfat8077 When will Vaush make the video about Paul standing firm against the waves?
Vaush's constant inability to get the fuck on with it has radicalized me against the concept of fashion, and now music.
The skip button:
Understandable, but also very radical.
No but vaush literally hates all music ever, you should love it with all your heart
@@kyyy8436 he doesn't hate music it just doesn't interest him very much I'm guessing its because of his adhd
@@tartipouss Bruh it's like half the fucken video
Vaush: I'm gonna go over this video about drama involving me
Also Vaush: *gridlocks with chat about music for 30 minutes*
You can't sit and listen to music in silence, there is music playing
🔥🔥🔥
4;33 is one you can though
@@bibsp3556 4;33. And no, that isnt music.
@nathanpapp432 my bad, typo. it is when you listen to it as part of a larger piece, no?
And even on its own, it's trying to say something. There are other examples of composed music where is is just a series of rests.
@@bibsp3556 Nah, postmodern music isnt music. That arrhythmic, atonal, "Im writing this with the express purpose of it being nonsensical and unlistenable" stuff isnt music. Its fart-sniffing wankery.
Jimmy Dore in 2016: "What if the moon fell into Lake Michigan?"
Paulsego in 2024: "A giant ass could descend from the boundless reaches of space."
History doesn't repeat itself, but it often rhymes.
What's weird about Paul is that he used to hate Jimmy Dore because he spat on Alex Jones, then he loved him for grifting and going after the Democrats and then he had to back away from Jimmy Dore when he became an anti-vaxxer.
What was the context of jimmy dore saying that 😭
@@dmc1673 The moon falling from the sky? He was arguing about supreme court justices with Sam Seder.
@@dmc1673"Sure let's say trump gets to pick one supreme court justice, let's say he gets two, or three, let's say the moon falls into Lake Michigan".
There's something sweet about the chatter asking what Roe V Wade is. Younger people are learning politics
> The editors did not make it a separate segment
Paul calling tucker Carlson a neocon is all we need to know about how caught up he is on things
Vaush's chat have to be fucking plants, surely? Vaush could tell them 4+4=8 and he'd get people in chat going
"Oh I see, so you're saying it's not possible for any other combination of numbers to add up to 8? Vaush doesn't get math."
“Vaush I think because you’re autistic you don’t have the life experience to realize 5+3 also = 8” ass chatters
Well the thing is i typically agree with vaush on a lot of things. The music thing is one i genuinely think hes just wrong on. He said outright music isn’t an art and that music cant be as deep as movies can be. I hope it isnt necessary to explain why these are bad points.
@@FishInTheGutter no way he said music isn't art, but he just isn't into music so he'd larp about movies but you can have as deep a convo between music fans as movie fans
@@FishInTheGutter No he literally did not. He said explicitly the exact opposite in this video like a hundred times. I do not know how much clearer it can be made for you.
I think they're trolls. They just like to see him get mad
If someone said they were into fashion, I wouldnt know how to talk to them.
With the pinkie extended, I assume.
@LimeyLassen this is so underrated
I don't know why you would bother talking to them about fashion. When you can talk to them about movies. Movies have people wearing clothes in them so you get both at the same time
@talkgoodenglish7500 @leapofthefrog these are the points chat should have been making 😂
If ever there is something you are unfamiliar about, sincerely ask them about it, the less you know the better.
If they are truly into something, they will be happy and passionate to talk to you about it, and as long as you are open-minded you will have a great, insightful conversation on something you've never paid much attention to.
Personally, these people are the most interesting people to talk to as long as you can get them to open up.
Vorsche: Liking music is not a personality trait
Chat: So, you're saying people who like music should be interred by brick into the nearest wine cellar. Wow. Take the L.
Fair, but liking films isn’t a personality trait either. And btw, most people who go and watch films also don’t talk about them much unless you’re a bit nerdy about it, so it’s not that different from music.
Maybe he just has a very different circle of people around him, but most people I know don’t talk about films or music, they just watch or listen to it and leave it at that.
@jonathanmarkham1998 this right here was my problem with his argument. It's cringe when people talk about music so much it's their personality, it's not cringe or the same with movies....OK buddy Vowsh
@@travdoggiedogg5525 Exactly. I have to admit I have been obnoxious at times in my liking of certain music and I get it but he acts like it’s somehow normal for people to do so about films.
If I went on and on about a particular film or its characters and it’s plot, most people would switch off too.
Vaush said you cant talk to people about music the way you can about movies. It was absurd.
He obviously has an outsized knowledge of movies enough to hold a conversation on, but entirely dismissed people having similar capabilities with music.
@@Luuuma7 Because he doesn’t care for music as much as he does films.
Also, maybe he has just never been surrounded by those types of people.
7:30 i think movies are much _easier_ to talk about casually than music or paintings. as a music nerd myself, i can talk about at least some kind of music for hours on end, if im talking to another music nerd. being super-knowledgeable on neither film nor paintings though, i personally find it easier to talk abot the emotional experience of watching a movie than that of looking at a painting, which i would hazard to guess is because watching a movie is a more easily explicable emotional experience. while a film tells a specific story, paintings, or indeed music are (in most cases) much more implicit in their messaging. this is very much a personal outlook though, so please don't be offended by my two cents, commenters.
I disagree slightly. Almost no one I know would watch a film and talk about it, the same as music, but maybe people in general do like talking about films, it’s just not my experience.
@@jonathanmarkham1998 they never claimed people do, just that it would be easier if they did
An extreme example would be the average person having a conversation about trains vs someone autistic. Each group isn't getting the same experience
Yeah that sounds right, just about anything (especially for artistic subjects) can have a lot of meaningful depth when you're very familiar with the subject. But a movie does have more obvious things to talk about.
Yep, it's easier to talk about a narrative and characters than it is to explain how the chord progression adds to the lyrics, it's really as simple as that
One of my primary interests is music and Vaush is right here, it's so hard to find people who can engage with the very personal experience you had with a song. That does not mean my experience is not that deep, but it does mean that my experience is personal
Yeah, of the friends I have who do the "listening to albums as a communal activity" thing, they're all musicians, some full on conservatory educated. The only time I've hung out with people who weren't musicians where the activity turned into just listening to an album, everyone was high. Hot take, I think a lot of the same ppl who got rustled over this take were the same who got rustled over his weed takes. It's giving "I still have a mandala tapestry I bought at east meets west hanging in my apartment "
Pauls Ego is such a massive manchild
Fuck you Ahov! Pauls Ego canvased one time in the 90s and supported the Occupy movement, he knows his shit! /s
I mean he literally calls himself PaulsEgo.
Most sane people will agree with you there.
What you're really saying is Paul's ego has been overwhelmed by his id.
He is massive because he's so fat.
30:47 to skip the brain-melting music tangent.
Paulsego saying the thing about the ass falling from the sky reminds me viscerally of Jimmy Dore saying “the moon might fall from the sky” to Sam Seder with regards to the Supreme Court turning conservative and Roe going away.
Edit: I posted this comment then unpaused the video and the same thing got said like 2 seconds later lol.
I make music and talking to people who don't have musical vocabulary is basically just "I like it when the music did the thing 😊" and then they hum it
That’s still cool though. Sometimes it’s refreshing to talk to people who don’t necessarily know all the fancy terminology.
yeah people with an adequate knowledge of music can 100% maintain a conversion about it
@@UberPlaysGames Funny thing is if anything, the average person knows way more songs than they do films.
@@jonathanmarkham1998as a musician, no they absolutely do not. They can tell you how it makes them feel, but like the original post said, that's about it.
Ask someone about Oppenheimer and you'll get some opinions and discussion about the narrative and characters and how this shot worked so well, etc. Ask them what they think about Drake and all you'll get is, "he's good, I liked his older stuff better. Fell off around here." Little discussion about the content of the songs, just whether or not they enjoyed it.
That's the difference, we're better equipped to discuss narratives than we are more emotional experiences like music or paintings because of how our brains process time and personal interactions. Doesn't mean you can't talk in depth about it, just that way fewer people will
@@drpepperman2765 That’s nonsense.
I went and watched Oppenheimer with a couple of people and I remember them saying afterwards that it was decent. That was it. No intention of having some conversation about the plot or anything else about the film.
I agree with you about music, but I think most people would be the same about films as well. If you’re around people that like to talk about either medium, you’re already in a niche.
Often times music can be very narrative driven as well.
Vaush needs to find a way to just say "Yeah, I couldn't engage with someone on X hobby because I'm not interested in X hobby". It would save him so much trouble.
no he wants to be objectively right about it though. so much so that he ends up just saying something obvious as fuck like "movies have more going on than music" no shit how is that platitude useful to anybody?
Chat should be more charitable in interpreting what he means. Its a two way street
@@thevotemanApprently it’s not a platitude because chat fucking rails against it lmao
@@thevotemanvery ironic of him being Mr. Utilitarian and then wasting half the video rambling about the most insignificant bullshit possible. You’re not as into music as everyone else so cool
My interpretation of what Vaush was saying is that on average people are not able to dig deep into music compared to movies because of the amount of content provided. Its not, I am not interested but more so less content for the average consumer to engage with. If I saw music as a hobby in a dating profile all i can really go with is you like x song or band and thats about it but with a movie I am more likely to be able to converse about messaging, quality, the actors, or something like that as someone who isn't deep into movies or songs.
The fact that half of this video isn’t even about Paul is gonna make Paul really mad lol
As someone who has watched Paul since the very beginning, I'm disappointed by how little he's changed in 15+ years
Forreal man seeing him go from the hilarious fan favorite from the early days of Drunken peasants to the eternally pessimistic grouch he is now is sad as fuck
He's like that friend who keeps saying and doing stupid shit and no matter how much you talk with him and tell him he needs to act mature, it just goes in one ear and out the other.
I recall him saying something like, "This is me, I'm not gonna change." So there's that and the fact that he talks down at young people for allegedly not knowing as much he does. These qualities are of someone who's set in their own ways and are not interested in growing. He's a narcissist.
@@PuppyLynch yea, I think that perfectly sums up the tragedy of PaulsEgo. Depression is not a personality.
Yes, he forgets that people can get dumber or more bitter with age. Seems like he feels more wise because his in his 40s, sometimes it's the other way around MY GUY, MY DUDE.
A thought I had recently: I actually don't remember the last time I've heard a person be like 'hey I got it wrong, I was wrong about that' just saying those words once in while would be nice. People aren't brave enough to admit their failure and its very sad. They never self reflect, they don't apologise sincerely, its always a forced apology that means nothing. I blame the internet cause its such an ego inflater. 😢
I miss people just being people with flaws, as opposed to being a machine that thinks its always correct. All of those podcasts and Internet shows aren't genuine, and I feel like giving up on them.
Scotty being reasonable compared to the other two just makes me think there’s a reason why he was awfully silent during their last convo (seriously, he had like 4 sentences in there). He was listening, and agreeing silently
Vaush commonly frames things as bluntly and as like.. contrarian-ly as possible to his audience or whoever he's talking to, then is surprised when people interpret him uncharitably lol.
Just dropping "I dont' like when people have 'I like music' in their profile" and "The only people worth your time are liberals" and then acting like OMG how could anyone find this disagreeable or react negatively to me saying this... like lol. Those statements aren't wrong at all, but I do feel like he is being disingenuous by acting like he's surprised those statements cause double takes.
Of course he *does* add nuance to those statements, but it's just not enough for a voice on the internet. Like, the balance and the timing is off. It's like he'll say "puppies make me sad" and then be like "how can you disagree that dog breeds with highly mutated flat faces are doomed to live uncomfortable difficult lives? Are you not sad knowing a pug puppy will struggle to breath all its life??" lol. I'M EXAGGERATING but yea
I feel like his take on weed use is frustrating, because I know he probably understands the benefits it has, even for frequent users. But he talks like he holds weed users in contempt which is really strange considering he takes adderall. Weed is often prescribed by doctors and I use it for clinical depression so hearing him talk like that makes me respect him less or at least want to actually know what he really believes. If he has made some kind of statement about it I have missed it, and I cant be expected to watch all of his content.
A lot of people really are being bad faith though, the community in his subreddits are the same way. That's completely true. He is stubbornly refusing to have tact sometimes I think and I agree he must know what reaction he is going to get. Maybe it gets him views.
@@Dante3214 Yeah, I think his weed takes are also influenced by that overexaggeration I was talking about, bc from all I've heard him say, it sounds like he is just super annoyed by people who make weed their whole personality.. but then he'll express that by saying 'i dont like weed' and then people are like ?? and then he doubles down and is like 'obvs i dont have a problem with weed it's this more specific thing' lol.
"TALK ABOUT THE ALLEGATIONS!!!!"
hahahahaha
Watching Vaush is like hearing my own internal ADHD-fueled obsessive shower arguments made into reality.
... This comment punched me in the jaw from the shadows, then helped me to my feet with the knowledge that I'm not the only one jacking up their water bill by spending an hour yelling at an imaginary Bill Maher or something.
(Fuckin hate that guy btw)
I feel kinda bad for Paulsego he's basically a manifestation of the pure essence of someone having given up on anything getting better... and it's also become his job. How sad is that.
Sad indeed
Real sad! I won't want ro meet him in person. He can stay out in California.
I love Vaush but his inability to have a fulfilling conversation about music alone is just a skill issue
Wait are you accusing him of not being able to do the autism riz strat but with music? And is that what chat was upset over?
Genuinely, i probably discuss music and lyrics more than films
@@TheDoomSheep it’s not about him not being able to do autistic rizz with it. It’s about him saying that music is essentially a worse conversational topic than movies because movies include music and is more multi-layered, completely missing the fact that most music that’s included in films is usually meant to be in the background and therefore doesn’t really encompass all of the things you can discuss about actual songs such as lyrics, arrangement, instruments used, the performances on each of them, production, history behind it’s conception, the live performances, the audience and critical reception to it, when you usually listen to it and what it means to you. There’s really tons of things you can discuss about music, it’s an incredibly multi-layered artform and still just because Vaush doesn’t have as deep of a connection with it he thinks it’s less interesting in general.
@@thegoalistheplan3868 Oh, for sure music is worse than movies as conversational centrepieces. Just think about it. When you're a movie fan, you can talk about movies for ages. But music? All you get is reeeeee. Totally unfulfilling. Absolutely unfulfilling twaddle. Let's move on.
I think the issue is the lack of distinction in what "conversation" can mean. I cannot have a light casual conversation about music that teaches anyone anything about me or my opinions there's just not enough information in musical small-talk the way there is in cinema-small-talk. The experience with music is so personal and internal that having a conversation about it requires a level of intimacy and comfort that is really hard to reach for with a person you're not already ultra comfortable with. Movies though? There's so many different things to focus on when it comes to talking about movies that you can have a comfortable, casual conversation that helps create that emotional intimacy that you need to have the more vulnerable conversations with music.@@phillipsiebold8351 (I don't know if this is how ~he~ feels about it to be fair, but this is my feelings on it which seem pretty inline with his words, and also my personal experience.)
I remember a few years ago Paul's Ego saying something about how Republicans were just posturing about getting Roe v. Wade overturned to garner political points, and Democrats were just posturing about codifying it so they garnered political points. At the time, I almost lent him some credence to that idea. Cynical politics. But today, with Roe v. wade actually gone and other rights coming up on the chopping block, it's clear who the actual cynic in the room is, and it's frustrating to see him so willfully deny the reality of the threat the Republicans pose. It's the story of Charybdis and Scylla, but instead of choosing the lesser of two dangerous paths and saving the ship and most of its crew, it's choosing neither and getting destroyed by Charybdis. It's truly one of the most vile forms of leftism that I've ever encountered. Not just because it's nihilistic and sad, but because it implicitly discourages people to use what little power they have to swing things in a relatively more positive direction.
Guys, I prefer a music date, but I can acknowledge that movies are a far easier social activity for most people.
Hes saying nothing about the ability to enjoy or discuss these things, only how well it works for socializing and dating. I honestly cant believe just how entirely unwilling any of you were to even try to understand his point. It wasn't a complicated or controversial point. In fact its one youd all agree with if you allowed yourselves to hear it.
"Tucker Carlson is a Traditional Neo-Con"
Remember that watch in Godzilla that stopped in time when the nuke dropped?
That's what happened to PaulsEgo on 9/11
Vaush is the few people who creates his own hills to die on
I feel Vaushs frustration. Some how people hear 2/3rds of a sentence and reply whole heatedly when in full context it's pretty freaking clear.
I diagnose them with Annoying Personality Disorder. It's incurable. Lethal, even
Vaush is an SCP. 50% of people just hear static when he talks 33.3% of the time.
I can also understand chat's frustration. One minute he's talking about how much/little you can unpack in a conversation about music, next minute his argument shifts to saying you can't really experience music with people like you can with movies. He probably has a good argument somewhere, he just needs to explain it better
@@EdWiley671The real chad move. Simping for the creator is easy.
Some chatters made legitimate points. Those were the first he banned. Some also got things wrong but not in an unreasonable manner for the most part. He communicated pretty poorly. And people saying he did a motte and bailey aren't exactly wrong.
The original thing he said was that he dislikes people who put "I like music" in their bio because you can't really talk about it. Then he gets mad and pretends people who challenge him on this with the obvious point plenty of people can. You can call it "adding nuance" and "people jumping to conclusions" but it's really. When you make absolute statements and then add a bunch of qualifiers later thats not people being "intentionally dense" when they challenge you on the original absolute statement.
Most of the time Vaush actually gets ban happy is because people challenge him with legitimate points or he just communicated very poorly.
I think it would be funny if people just spammed "Paul is Vaush's Brett Keane" on their videos.
Thanks to watching Vaush, I have joined the Greens party (in my country) and I now participate in writing public submissions. If I had watched Paulsego, I probably would have stayed in bed waiting for the world to end.
I was ready to laugh at the DFF dudes, but the music diatribe there at the beginning kind of got me a little. I like Vaush, but some of his non-political takes are just baffling to me lately, and his tendency to insist that people aren't listening to him while psychoanalyzing and banning is just... cringe and weird.
I also hate his use of the word slop. He doesn't know what he's talking about 90% of the time when talks media but will call everything slop.
Bit silly to get offended over it. He’s just some guy. I do agree though. He seems to be very stubborn but anyone who’s watched him for a while knew that anyway tbf.
Because he thinks he can debate his way out of any bad take instead of engaging directly with the critique of his take. I try my best to avoid Vaush talking about culture of any kind.
I dunno, I find incredibly subjective snap banning hilarious. People have subjective opinions on media and none of them are wrong or right. It literally doesn't matter what Vaush thinks about music or art in general. He's not wrong, neither is anyone else. I was watching somebody unironically defend Nickleback the other day. I don't understand that position at all and think its stupid but eh...I also don't understand why people watch reality TV. Media opinions of others literally don't matter.
@@cmcneil726 Yeah, I thought it was just a fun meme that his culture takes were bad but.... man, it really feels like he somehow misses the mark 100% of the time. And not only that, he always needs to insist that his take is objectively correct and get really worked up about it.
Paul is becoming more Manatee-like every day.
Yes, you can have interesting and in depth conversations about music.
Yes, people who only list liking music on a dating profile is pretty much exactly the same as saying they “like to travel” or “like to eat”, in that it doesn’t give you much to work with
The average person with no specific interest in music or movies will have an easier time engaging with and holding a conversation about a movie than a song/album. Obviously, musicians/audiophiles will get more out of sitting and listening to a song. Vaush's point is that's harder to do with a random person or normie for an extended period of time than sitting and watching a movie.
11:51 “ i don’t mind people disagreeing” after banning 4 people
21:56
@@kmoney890just a very Hasan thing to do 🤣
Nah that's valid, I'm sure it was a 24h timeout
@@tinyturtle1898yeah he said as much. Also why people were literally asking to be banned for this bit lol
Here's how the average person talks about music.. "I like it".
Same for movies! :D
Paul is demonstrating a classical example of someone who's engaging in the "Inescapable Trial and Error Fallacy"
Short definition: The "Inescapable Trial and Error Fallacy" refers to a logical error where one assumes that because a solution has not been found through trial and error, no solution exists, without considering other possible methods or factors that could lead to a solution. It essentially overlooks alternative approaches or avenues for solving a problem beyond the ones attempted.
Vaush struck such a goddam nerve by being right for over an hour in discussion with DFF. They can't get over it lmao
he what's right? About?
I absolutely loved the drug video TJ posted. It was genuinely hilarious to watch how stupid they are. “You drink coffee and drink alcohol occasionally… therefore you’re exactly like someone who’s addicted to heroin.”
@@NikoNikolaia Anyone reading this, please pay very close attention to the cheap rhetorical trick the person I'm replying to is trying to pull.
So what are they doing, exactly?
They're asking an intentionally vague question about a lengthy discission, in the hope that the fact no one will _bother_ to bring them up to speed from scratch will make it look like no one is _able_ to.
But TubaInferno , if you're actually committed to the charade, you can just specify a timestamp from the conversation, and we can discuss who's right about what.
@@eye-chan1711the tj drug video was pretty reasonable.
it is wrong of vaush to ascribe the adjective "untrustworthy" to a person because of habitual drug use. when confronted on this, all vaush does is go "OH SO DO YOU THINK THAT SOMEONE HIGH ON WEED 24/7 IS THE APEX OF LUCIDITY????"
@@hadronoftheseus8829
So what's wrong with getting some form of clarification? Do they mean right in perspective to their opinion or like the means that they are objectively right?
A 30 min stun lock in a 1hr 10 min video. Now THIS is the kind of art that I want to critically engage with
What’s interesting is that I first learned of Vaush FROM Paulsego. I watched/listened to their talk around the height of George Floyd in May/June of 2020. It was a pretty good conversation and I’ve been a bigger Vaush fan than the DFF boys since. I do enjoy the three, but similar to Hasan, they have notable flaws.
Come from a family of musicians, and I love music. That said, I'm also friends with a geotech engineer who could spend far longer talking about soil than my dad could about music, because anything can be interesting and have depth. The difference between music and movies is to have a discussion about a song, you need to be interested in the song. Whereas for a movie, being interested in it could involve being interested in any of the songs, or the visual components as well.
That's not to say movies have more depth to them, or that movies are more interesting. Far from it. It's just that if you're going to talk to a random person about something, and you two don't know what your common interests are, chances are much higher to find something in a movie than in a song.
Surface level conversation about a movie: "That was a nice movie. I liked it when Ding Dong used the thingy to do that thingy. I thought it was a funny scene." - "Oh right. Yes, I felt like that was funny too. I also liked the sad moment."
Surface level conversation about a song: "This song slaps. I like the rhythm." - "Yes."
It's so weird how Vaush can't just say "I personally find more inspiration for conversation from movies and video games compared to music." No, apparently he needs to claim something inherent about these art forms makes them easier to talk about in the broadest sense. When an artform has fewer overlapping elements, it often forces the audience to engage with the elements that are there on a deeper level, which is ripe for conversation. He probably realized this was a bad argument, which is why he pretended like his argument was about narratives the whole time. Vaush dumb
Yep. Then he gets mad when people call him out on it.
Its gonna be so funny to see the follow up to the follow up because that will mean the deep fat boys will have to wade through nearly a half hour of vaush yelling at chat over music.
Vaush's take on music is so insanely myopic
Edit: well after the whole rant his position is perfectly reasonable. Idk how he initially expressed it but it was probably in a way that invites misunderstanding lol
I think it’s people who jump to comment before Vaush has even had a chance to inject the nuance he always does after his initial statement.
Yeah thats the problem. After. His initial take was dumb and he got mad at people rightly challenging it. Then he adds a dozen qualifiers and pretends that was totally his actual point and people were just being "intentionally dense". Ridiculous. I am just glad he rarely treats politics like this.
The music stunlock lasts until 30:50 in case anyone is interested.
Vaush: there’s more to factor when talking about movies as it’s a collage of mediums vs strictly music
Chat: So you hate music????
I'd say the reason is the numerous mediums involved in filmmaking are like casting a net.
If you and your buddies watch s movie one of you can comment on production design, someone else on music and s third one will talk about writing but you all watched the same thing.
That's actually what I love about discussing cinema.
But have you studied musical theory?
But vaunch does hate music
@@manuelmialdea5127this is so true
What Vaush actually said originally: Putting an interest in music in your dating bio is stupid and you can't really have a good conversation about it.
What some people actually said in response: I had great conversations with dates so this seems kinda ridiculous.
Then he starts banning people. And *then* he adds a bunch of qualifiers and pretends it's other peoples fault they didn't magically get that he actually has a much more nuanced position than the absolute statement he originally made.
Music snobs who can't put themselves in the mindset of somebody who doesn't have the same tastes in music are insufferable. I like music, but I have major gaps in certain genres, and whoooo boy did one of my coworkers not know how to handle that. Like, he would name drop several '70s punk bands and such, and I would awkwardly have to admit I know nothing about these bands, and he would just sit there, thinking less of me. There was no attempt to share his enthusiasm for these bands -- he just wanted to feel superior.
Contrast this with a friend who is into music theory. Plays the cello. Taught himself bass guitar. His favorite piece of classical music is Ravel's Daphnis and Chloe. I had heard it before, but it had never clicked. Then one night while hanging out, he put it on, and explained what was going on with harmonies and different instruments. His nerdy energy was infectious. There was no condescension, just pure joy. And now I am a Daphnis and Chloe fan.
Paul is the prime example of why we gotta get rid of these lead pipes.
Dealing with people like Paul in HS and early on my navy job unironically was the driving force of my neoliberal/neoconservative phase. I've moved on since then
Surely it can't be worse than the brain damage of conservatives, though?
A small point:
6:23 "You can't listen to music together with a person and have the same kind of extensive conversations or opinions on it the way you can with a movie because [...] a movie has more overlapping elements to engage with than music--obviously: movies contain music plus other things."
There's no steelman for this statement it's simply ignorant. The end there, that movies "contain music," presupposes that music in isolation is at all comparable to music as a constituent of a movie. It's the idea that music is just sensational, that you simply hear music and it sounds nice or bad or neutral, that it couldn't have any meaning. It's not even wrong, like someone saying, "An image looks good or bad or meh. Who cares if an AI made it? An image is just an image." I believe this is ignorance of music as an art form that is equivalent to "AI artists" insisting that there can be no deeper meaning in images.
Edit:
I forgot how long this segment goes on about music. About 18:03 he says this isn't about music knowledge and I agree; this isn't about music knowledge specifically, it's about art knowledge generally. I want to clarify that I believe he believes two songs in isolation is "less than" the same two songs if they were in a movie. There's less content or less to unpack because, literally, the whole songs are in the movie. I believe he believes that. I argue that that's missing a point that there can be "more" to the songs in isolation versus appearing in the movie. "More" not being literally more content, but other, separate meaning that could be absent in the film. This separate meaning can be artistic in narrative and/or non-narrative ways, and this can warrant analysis and discussion that wouldn't apply to their appearance in the film.
It feels like I would need to show an example to make this point heuristically...
"small point"
*writes essay*
I mean small since his ideas aren't consequential because it's just about a personal perception of art. I do care about it because I care a lot about art, though.
My only exposure to the DSA was I saw some at a Palestinian protest and they came by my neighborhood to petition abortion on the ballot (I live in the south)
One thing I really respect about voosh is his separation of reality and online leftism. He’s fully aware of the limits we work in as leftist. Vaush is effective and netizens hate it lol
"listening to music and looking at paintings isn't a social thing that you can share and talk to someone about in depth" ...has he seriously never been to a concert or an art museum with friends or a date or whatever? i've talked to people about music and paintings for hours, vawsh is just straight up wrong here, thinking his disinterest and ignorance when it comes to music means it objectively isn't engaging
Straight up dude. It's an insane take tbh
And yet Paul is saying that Vaush said music lovers should be shot you can call him ignorant which is fine multiple music majors are both agreeing and dissagreeing and yet somehow Paul is still insane
He means it as in for everyone in general. If you go on a blind date with someone and get to pick 1 thing to spend the afternoon with, without knowing anything about the other person, going to watch the movies is the safest option, as it has a narrative structure that is universal to human. If the other person has different age, passion, creed, religion, ... chances are that watching movies is safe bet that you come out of the afternoon having something to break the ice. Looking at paintings and music should be after you get to know the other person a little bit, knowing their interest. Having said that you absolutely can talk about those two immediately, but it is much restricted. If you meet someone in a concert, chances are that you will be able to immediately talk about music, but this is a more specific circumstance.
Going to a concert and listening to music are totally different experiences...
His whole point is almost entirely centered around dates, especially first dates. If you take two random pairs going on a first date, one watches a movie that neither person has seen, the other listens to an album neither of them have listened to, do you really think chances are good that both pairs will have the same amount to talk about?
Now if instead of just listening to the music they went to a concert to hear it, yeah I'd agree. Because the concert isn't just the music. There's the lines, the crowds, the smells, the food, plus whatever is visually happening on stage.
What's the time stamp for your quote btw? I don't remember it but he might have said it, but it's also clearly not an actual summary of his position.
average person.
Skip to 30:45 if you want to skip Vaush badly articulating his position on music and dating profiles.
Starts at 30:54
7:09 what if someone said they enjoyed reading? could you engage with that?
the problem isn't with music as an interest, the problem is you're musically illiterate. you're getting better about it though, your music takes 4 years ago almost radicalized me to the far right istg
but yeah music is a form of communication in the same way as fashion. and just like you had to with fashion, you have to learn how to appreciate and talk about music.
Vaush's confidence is a double edged sword.
In one hand he really transmits confidence in progressive ideas and that brings people over.
On the other hand he is way too comfortable giving his opinions as if they were facts on topics he isn't well versed in.
That, in turn, can make people question his politics takes.
Yeah if he isn’t into a subject it’s just dismissal
The problem is Vaush is on the spectrum and magically forgets about it. He never sat down to consume and talk about music with someone because hasn't gotten his dick wet with Tindussy.
He did specfically address this point tho. Books have a narrative, which is easier for the everyman to engage in discussion about as opposed to music, where you need a certain degree of expertise to have a decent conversation about it.
Nah he's entirely correct. It's alot easier to have only a passing interest in a movie while still being able to discuss it vs having the same interest in a song. Saying you "like" music is just a vague and worthless as saying you drink water
I'm so tired of Pauls shit
Don't subscribe his channel and chat with him. He's a dick!
The DSA where I live has a dude that wears a ushanka to every meeting unironically. Montana is fucked lol
He could just be cold :)
It gives him +1 intellegence.
Hey, I’m fat cus my back is bent
No tellin where my couch from IKEA went
salty paul
round as a ball
As someone whose perfect first date with their long-time partner was going to an art museum and staring at art for a while, I'd like to say that that date probably only worked because I am an artist and they are an art historian. (and we still do movies as a date more often than museums.) The idea of just listening to music as a date being on par with movies is laughable unless you are pretty serious musicians. I feel like it's pretty obvious that there is just wayyy more to engage with in movies even if it isn't your field. Not to say folks shouldn't be putting on an album and enjoying it with their partners from time to time, but it's clearly different
That music take will always be bad, and it's so crazy how you default to calling people who disagree with you bad faith. It think it's pretty bad faith to be bad at communicating your point, get emotional when people disagree, and then just call them bad faith to avoid the discussion.
Paul's ego is so aptly named 😂 unfortunately he can't back up that ego
😂
I think there’s a decent point layered into the music argument, but the argument Vaush is making here is broader than the legitimate argument. I think the argument you could actually make is roughly that movies are easier to engage with, when what Vaush said is “film is more layered than music,” which is absurd
Movies have an entire visual element that music doesn't - if that's not an extra layer then nothing is, ya weirdo
i agree
@@williamchamberlain2263 if you want to sit here and claim that Ace Ventura or Jack and Jill has more layers than something like the Rite of Spring, I can’t help you. The concept of quantifying how many layers a work of art has completely misunderstands what art is. There is absolutely music that’s more complex than some movies. You could identify a trend that film *typically* is more complex than music. But saying it as a rule rather than a trend is patently absurd.
Chat thinking vaush is saying music is worse than movies when he’s actually saying most people don’t have the skills to dissect music the way they could dissect a movie says a lot about chat.
One thing i am very confident in is that socialism cannot be achieved top down. Even if there was a communist president it probably wouldn't achieve much without an amount of grassroots support for socialism that does not exist today.
The rant ends at 30:55
I defended you in the comments of onion nuggets channel Vaush. But Paul has valid criticism in regards to defending status quo demoocrats and lesser evil voting being a problem for catalyzing real substantial change in politics.
I actually kinda agree with Vaush that movies have more layers than music - cuz it's MULTImedia...but generally curious what he thinks about movies/tv/film vs. VIDEOGAMES as a primary conversation center. Would movies still be the best talking point? Cuz you could argue videogames have the most amount of layers.
Just the fact that the only right-wing media personality he keeps naming is Rush Limbaugh shows how out of touch Paul is. And calling the modern right-wing neocons lol TUCKER CARLESON
Pauls ego has no idea what he's talking about
Agree 👍
As someone who isn't THAT invested in music I feel like you can definitely discuss songs and albums/compare and constrast different artists in very much the same way you can with movies. And the same goes for paintings. You can definitely get lost in conversations about the artistic technique, cultural implications, and history associated with paintings. Those conversations just aren't interesting to Vaush and that's fine but it doesn't mean they don't exist.
"Banned"
@@herec0mestheCh33f So much for the tolerant left
theres literally like podcasts where you can watch people talk about an album together for hours on youtube lol, like vaush is just being purposefully ignorant about this for some reason
An that wasn't his point.
Can you talk about a song without comparing it to other songs or do you need the comparison to be able to talk about it?
I can't tell the difference between 2 hours of plot and dialogue and the narrative infused in a piece of music because the pieces of music I listen to are two hours long.
unless you are describing a musical, you are literally insane. or i guess you might be joking, because this is a ridiculous thing to say.
"vaush, read music theory!" "vaush do you know about music theory?"
I agree with Vaush's music take. Music is so hard to talk about that's why we dance to it. We literally invented another art form in order to express how we feel about it
Can’t dance to Leonard Cohen
"the solution to all problems is to just stop doing bad things, have you ever thought about that? "
- DFF masterminds
I had to stop watching this ten minutes in. What I THOUGHT Vaush was trying to say was that HE didn't find as many layers in music and so he wouldn't want to date anyone if that was their primary interest because he wouldn't be able to talk about that subject for extended periods of time.
But then, after everyone he banned was bringing up their opinions depth of interest/talking. He says. "Music just doesn't have as many layers as movies, that's an objective opinion."
No. It's not. For it to be objective there has to be concrete variables. Tell me about the layers. Quantify the layers of which you can talk about a movie vs music. My boyfriend plays several instruments, and I went to film school. We have just as deep and layered conversations on each subject.
I was just starting to come back to this community after having to leave for a while because everything got so negative. I've done a lot of work on myself and I just can't watch or support someone who is this mean and insists he is objectively correct on something subjective. This was really deeply upsetting. Vaush is just wrong about this. 100% wrong.
It's okay if you don't have a lot to talk about on a subject. That doesn't mean the subject has no depth. God this is just so sad.
"Banned lmao"
What do you mean by starting to come back to this community?
He’s just a guy, it’s not that deep.
I do agree though, he’s quite ignorant on this one and I think he is wilfully to some extent.
"That doesn't mean the subject has no depth" Absolutely not what he said
Ok on the music point, it reminds me of when people put down "Food" as one of their interests on dating apps and it's like??? What do you like eating it? Seeing it? Cooking? Baking? It gives you nothing to work off lol
you earn the people being defensive when you go about "Mah Subjectivity" for art, people will be bad faith if you try to be Objective, the same way you are conveniently allergic to Objectivity when your feelings are involved.
I was a classical musician for over a decade and went on dates with other musicians. It’s very hard to carry out a conversation about music with a layperson, mostly due to music theory not being a common area of knowledge for most people. As for discussing music with other musicians, that can last for hours lol.
You can tell how disingenuous a conversation is based on how a person will hear a statement and discuss it while intentionally ignoring the explanation that came immediately after... almost like chat when it came to the music comment🤔🤔🤔
Your and Vaush's parasocial treatment of chat as some sort of hivemind is just weird.
Also "the explanation that came after" wasn't really an explanation of the original statement. It was a bunch of new qualifiers. Some of which completely contradict the original one. It's why one chatter accused him of motte and bailey. Because it kinda was.
@XMysticHerox parasocial? I don't think you know what that means. I have no attachment to anyone or anything and nothing I said implies such
20:22 this is actually why i love MF DOOMs story telling, he creates interesting narratives and characters that are easy to engage with while creating an excellent wall of sound whether its with the help of a collaborater or his solo work.
Ita important to involve "multimedia" elements into any form of art to create an engaging dialog
And i also think thats why sampling (when its done well) hits a certain way to so many people becuase it involves a lot of media we all can engage with externally
My favorite examples are sci fi food recipes lol
This is like, the not funny version of Drunken Peasants.
As a former opioid addict I can can confirm that you shouldn't trust a habitual user.
I would literally steal from my parents for weed money. I still smoke but I'm in a much healthier place now and it's very evident to me that most of the people angry about Vaush's take is just really insecure and worried they may also be dependent on this substance. I think Keffals (an ex coke addict) made a pretty good defense of Vaush's take.
The first 15 minutes is so painful and I wish Vaush would stop being a baby when people disagree on the lightest of topics lmao
He has autism.
It's not the disagreement, it's that people seem to go out of their way to misinterpret things he says in the worst possible way. They take the lightest criticisms of their hobbies as personal attacks.
I don't think it's that it's more these videos need time stamps to skip over stuff we didn't come here for.
No, thats.... kinda what Vaush does. He bans anyone who disagrees with him at all lol@@fleecejohnson9813
Vaush: Saying obviously true and uncontroversial things.
Chat: Coming up with progressively more off-base nitpicks.
Me: Eating popcorn.