ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 21 ต.ค. 2021
- Going over some of the attitudes espoused by Vaush which ultimately represent a larger systemic issue normally present in people new to Leftism, particularly on the topic of Nationalism.
Yes we've all probably been there at some point, the idea is to get out of it.
Some relevant links:
Flower's original video
• The Master Debater Vau...
Vaush and Flower's debate
• Talking With Professor...
Baldwin's speech
• James Baldwin - Pin Dr... - เกม
If you still have misunderstandings with the complexity of racism especially within Left spaces, this is by far the most essential reading I've found on the topic:
The Progressive Plantation by Lorenzo Kom'boa Ervin.
libcom.org/library/progressive-plantation-racism-inside-white-radical-social-change-groups
lmao nerd. Imagine reading.
Reading is good
Vaush libs here
LIBcom? What a LIBeral bro
Book bad
The difference between actual minority groups and their "allies" is something I really came to appreciate during my country's plebiscite on same-sex marriage.
While most straight people were against homophobia, they didn't take it as seriously as LGBT people did. In fact, they spent most of their time tone-policing us, saying that "I can be respectful of them, even if I disagree with their opinions, why can't you?".
All I could think was "Who are YOU to be telling me to tolerate homophobia? Of course YOU can tolerate it, it doesn't affect you at all. Don't talk to me as if we're the same".
That's why self determination is important, minorities should be able to talk as a group, and not have their voices diluted by people who don't share their struggles.
GODS i feel this so much
If your in a white country you're in a country of the world wide minority maybe leave them alone? Go to your own countries
Why should anyone tolerate lgbtq+ if you don't want to tolerate homophobia?
Most of the people secretly despise you all, yet they are trying to be tolerant. Are you special or something what you have a right to not tolerate people what you don't like but we don't?
I despise "tolerance", I especially despise middle-class and rich people being prideful about their preventions while the rest of us live in poverty and have real problems.
"I waz misgendered", "hompfopy us efryvere".
Fuck off.
as I said in a rant I have in a discord server:
"Also something that I kinda feel when seeing discussions about idk, [insert oppressed group here] liberation, from for example, white cishet Americans, is that they treat latin americans, black people, indigenous people, lgbt people and so on, like some vegetarians treat other animals, they see oppressed groups as people they are "so sorry for them being harmed for my benefit", and their opinions on it are all based in having a moral highground over people, that's why they have so much of this "ethics thought experiment" approach to these subjects, and why they do... the stuff cited above, and why some of them are debate bros."
youre gay?
James Baldwin is one of the most insightful people I've ever come across. There is a conversation on TH-cam between him and Nikki Giovanni which I highly recommend. They have an exchange about half way in that lasts a good 25% of the discussion where he and Nikki disagree on issues affecting black women. After 30ish minutes of pushing back against each other he eventually concedes his position and come to understand and agree with her. It is so interesting to see such a brilliant person not only have a massive blind spot in regards to woman's struggle but also have the humility to change his opinion in real time
Good video, but an important point on Ireland: It's incorrect to label Ireland "a former colony". Ireland is both colonised and semi-colonised to this day. The overt colonial occupation of British state forces remains in the northern 6 counties, while the 26 counties constitutes a semi-colonial bureaucrat capitalist regime. In fact, the British ruling class still owns all the government bulldings in Dublin (and the ground upon which they're built through the ongoing remnants of the feudal system of ground rents) in which the counter-revolutionary 26-county Free State government operates.
Ireland today is thus colonised and semi-colonised
God this is depressing to think about
@@femmedracula6857 Unfortunately, yeah. Many of us would prefer to pretend that colonialism in Ireland is just a thing of the past - "ignorance is bliss", etc.
Aye
Based and Connolly-pilled
omg i love your videos
As someone who’s an outspoken Irish Republican (being an Irish American and part of the Irish diaspora), I’ve actually been accused of “ethnonationalism” and “religious bigotry” by other leftists who think that when I say “England out of Ireland” and “Ireland belongs to the Irish” I don’t mean “Ireland should be socially, politically and economically controlled by the people of Ireland (ie anyone living in Ireland) and not by a foreign power (ie England)”, rather they think I mean “All Ulster Scots and Protestants and anyone else who isn’t of Gaelic ancestry and Roman Catholic should be forcibly expelled from Ireland”, and the fact I’ve been accused of that has given me a lot more understanding of black nationalists and indigenous activists and very little sympathy for people like Vaush
Well according to Flowers’ position it would be a valid response to genocide or forcibly expel any Protestants or Brits in Ireland.
@@sweetpotato24 citation needed
@@SunflowerSocialist sure, no problem. Watch the debate she had with Vaush, she says multiple times that oppressed people have the right to forcibly expel colonizers. When asked specifically about genocide she said “it’s not ideal” “but they have the right.”
you can't play "oh it's just people living in ireland" game with black or indigenous nationalism though because those are nationalisms explicitly predicated on ethnicity and race
@@sweetpotato24
I mean that doesn’t sound bad at all, I don’t care for colonizers.
The power of Vaush's takes is so strong that it made BadMouse make TH-cam videos again
@@Andrearuch97 so strongly shit itakes they ressurect dead youtubers from their grave
Vaush's major problem is that he's very good at speaking and he knows it. So sometimes just brute forces his way through ill thought out rubbish because he knows he can do it so persuasively he even convinces himself at the time when he's just making it up as he goes along.
@@timk6181 It's the same saying things with self-assuredness manner of speaking that people like Bill O'Reilly and Rush Limbaugh used for years, despite being factually wrong all the time.
@@fun_ghoul I don't think so, I think it's simply a case of confidence (and his position as a big political TH-camr) outstripping intellect. I don't think it's Machiavellian or grifting, I think he's trying for sincerity even when he's winging it. He's simply confidently wrong.
Dialectics in action
Steve Biko is also important in this discussion. His writing is similar in attitude to Malcom X's but it is from the context of decolonialism and black liberation movements in South Africa and the Global South in general
I've read an essay (or few) on biko and he kept popping up in my head when listening to people give terrible takes on decolonisation. Its very clear a lot of these people (vaush, I mean vaush) do not know anything about colonialism and simply don't want to.
sorry sweaty he was a stinky tankie so we should listen to some random white college student from iowa instead. /s
_I Write What I Like_ is a great place to start for anyone looking to get into Biko's work. Another good one is _The Testimony of Steve Biko_
The capitalist class wants to keep the working class divided. They do that with liberal pluralism and Idpol. They want groups to be ethnically conscious rather than class conscious. They want groups to focus on preserving their identities, cultures, and separate spaces rather than have working class unity.
@Karl Marx How is race real and why is it important? Shouldn’t a society be principled and adaptable enough from a base ethic stand point to disallow those immutable characteristics to work themselves into diversions?
If not, and race *is important*, which one is better/superior and does that depend on what the governance style/economic system present?
Thank you in advance.
Just FYI Druids are a reconstructionist pagan religion not a reconstructed ethnicity, same thing with variously Norse, Celtic, and Hellenic, etc. paganism. Some people may connect it with their ancestral ties to a region but that explicitly is not a requirement.
If people wanna do that that's fine, I have Neopagan-esque friends myself.
Someone can't just claim however to be a old age pagan and claim 'indigeneity' to the land as an oppressed group and desire land back etc like the native Indians. Obvz barely anyone does this, its a point of how indignity comes to be and the contrasts between these two examples.
@@BadMouseProductions You've never heard of the indigenous Sámi people of Scandinavia then? They're a historically oppressed group of people within Norway, Sweden, and Finland that have been forced out of land by those countries for hundreds of years.
@@ragingroyal729 badmouse didn't argue against this self determination of the Sami, he is talking about pagans in England who claim to be indigenous.
@@BadMouseProductions We Celtic Reconstructionists don't do that. We are also not the same as neo-druids. A lot of celtic reconstructionism is actually preserving celtic languages as they're under threat of legitimate linguicide because of the efforts (from even the last century) by the English to deprive us celtic people of our languages and identities.
I think a lot of us go back even 2000 years ago in history because that's the beginnings of what peoples like the Irish are still dealing with today.
And Celtic Reconstructionism is... both religious and cultural. But we don't have any land-back movement like indigenous peoples. We do want things like a united Ireland and a free Scotland. That's what could be considered our current goals/movements as ethnic peoples, if any.
@@robbedeboer2728 Celtic people technically kinda are. But it's complicated. We aren't directly comparable to native americans, aborigines, and other indigenous peoples. We have very different histories of being conquered. But celtic people do still have a lot of modern struggles because of England. There's deeply horrific and saddening histories with what's happened to the Irish, the Scots, the Manx, the Cornish, the Welsh, the Bretons.
The only time I've seriously seen anything about us celts being called indigenous is our languages. But yeah, if others are trying to claim they're indigenous in the way we use the term politically... they're being a bit shitty. But I haven't heard other very proud celtic reconstructionists claim we're that specifically, despite how much we do talk about the horrific shit that's happened to us over hundreds of years and in modern times.
I came here after Vaush platformed a Zino ethno stater the irony of Vaush fans in these comments claiming BaddMause is a supporter of ethnic cleansing.
@@fun_ghoul “Not voting is good for our movement!”
This is why tankies are a minority and should stay a minority.
@@_viken the argument isn't whether voting itself in elections is bad. The argument is that whether you should fall in line with the Democrats at every single turn.
Is it not damning on the American left that they couldn't even get universal healthcare, a raise in the minimum wage and more? Such things were accomplished by the Labour movements in other nations decades ago. How can you call your movement successful when you've not even managed to achieve basic social democratic reform?
@@needsaname5696 That’s why we keep voting on a local level to replace corporate dems with progressive dems. The more progressive dems there are, the more chance they can pass progressive change. If we don’t vote for Democrats, we don’t vote for anyone. This is the argument. I’d rather keep fascists out of power.
@@_viken It's fool-hardy to think you're going to replace the Democratic power structure with a more progressive one just through your vote. Not to mention many of them end up making a right-wing turn.
And Liberalism creates the conditions for Fascism to occur, in the end you're just gonna be stuck in the trap of voting for the Dems over and over.
Not that there is a massive difference between the Dems and the GOP.
@@needsaname5696 So we commit political violence and make everyone hate us? Great idea!
James Baldwin was such an amazing writer and speaker.
Not so far long ago I remember running into a Mexican which lives in a dangerous part of it asking me on the state of Bosnia and so on, and we had a small discussion between the bad states of both me and him, whilist in 99% of cases when I mention my heritage in front if western leftists they make fun of it and meme it whilist pushing that their suffering is more important and vicious than of oppressed people
I think an interesting take away is how conversations can be valuable to understanding one another. I can’t lie I am shocked to see how many Vaush fans just missed the videos core point about how debates are at times pointless if nothing down right vitriolic. A space where two or more people can be open about their experiences/opinions leads to way more interesting dialogues.
@@coolfear360 His fanbase is pretty dumb on average.
“Lives in a dangerous part”
Do you have the slightest idea how little that narrows it down lol.
"Worker oppresion is far worze?!!!"😡
@@coolfear360 exactly beacuse no one really wins in debates at the end of the day Vaush's audience is going to have the same views as they did before watching the debate even if vaush were to "lose" and so will the person they debated audience will also have the same views even if they were to "lose" the debate, it changes nothing no ones views are really challenge because its all seen as some weird form of entertainment whereas having to actually talk to someone with no cameras involved and not in front of an audience actually makes you listen and you don't feel the pressure to admit that your wrong
the strongest yt debate I've ever had the desire to watch was the ones on the game theory channel from years ago...
at least those paint the clearest picture of the fact that yt debates are more about showmanship than argument
it’s hilarious to me to see people advocate that debate s all about showmanship when the video in question has no actual arguments or quantitative data that proves anything wrong or supports anything they’re advocating and , just uses carefully clipped and cherry picked clippings with someone dictating what other people mean and or are saying....
it’s laughable when the anti debate bros squad talk about how useless debates are while circle jerking in their own carefully crafted eco chamber/channels and bubble where they don’t have to have any opposing viewpoint and can edit and straw-man at will any narrative they please.
Also it was laughable for Mouse to praise the Nation of Islam, a registered hate group who literally preach nd teach lessons on the evils of homosexualityty and anti septic, and anti jewish rhetoric
but that he praises malcom x when it was the nation of islam who killed him....Malcom X’s own widow has publicly accused and stated members of the Nation of Islam are involved in her husbands murder and wear that fact openly as a badge of honor in their circles.
But he thinks he can praise it because it advocates for black Americans as a way of owning Vaush
He also uses in the last scene a clip of james baldwin, where baldwin spefifically says that white and black Americans must come together in national unity to overcome the effects and uncomfortable fact of racial oppression so that all can achieve the American dream or have equal opportunity...
which counters his entire opening abut how black and whites working together is infantile baby leftism....
lol what a fucking knob.
Most of the extremes of Malcolm X was dirty work from the media giants and propaganda. Many of the things he said were by far not as extreme (if you listened to the whole thing) as it was advertised.
An issue with these "TH-cam debates", is that it is more a football match than an actual debate, including their own forms of hooligans (Vaush''s followers for instance). A debate is to sway the other person or to learn from each other, not to "DESTROY" them or "Win". Yes debate training does that, yes debate clubs do that, but that isn't what a debate is for.
It just feels like idiotic political ideas of what a debate is done by career politicians, seeped through more into modern culture. First on the Extreme right " DESTROYS < MINORITY Y> Watch now!" and now also on the left.
Like it's so pointless, you feel so tired after watching even a second of it. It's arguing not a debate. And it gets on your nerves (unless your a follower). But you can see the tiredness in the eyes of his guest, and I'm surprised by her patience. I wouldn't not have that, and would walk straight into their traps of "see he ran scared/is destroyed". So kudos to Flower for staying so darn calm about it all.
6:16 Cornish and welsh people: you may now start grinding your teeth.
So fucking true
Ikr, it was quite funny in the context of the video. Clearly you can't trust the Hibernians.
IIRC BadMouse is welsh.
@@fun_ghoul Engus McHoxha, head of state of the People's Republic of Alba
@@fun_ghoul point taken
Glad to see you back!
FD mentioned you in his video and I am so happy I decided to check this video out!
Māori probably settled permanently in Aotearoa / New Zealand around 1300. It’s hotly debated whether pre-Māori culture existed (usually referred to as Moriori), with some people here claiming descent and disputing the Treaty settlements process between the Crown and Māori tribal representatives.
There were different migration waves, and a lot of movement and commerce between Pacific Islands nearby (possibly regular travel even as far afield as Hawaii), and you could do cultural hair-splitting over ‘pre-Māori’ people (if that could ever be proven), but Europeans only started living here in the early 1800s. So while that isn’t thousands of years of an established pre-white settler culture (primarily but not exclusively British) it’s a lot more than 300.
(Abel Tasman located these islands in 1642, but no Europeans are known to have set foot here before James Cook’s exploration.)
Earliest oral records from Māori go back much further as well. I do need to correct you on the idea of Moriori as a pre-Māori culture though, they were a culturally distinct group that migrated to Rekohu around the same time as later "Māori" migratory waves. There's absolutely no current debate on this outside of conspiracist circles.
It's good to note that just as BM talks about in the video in regards to "Native Americans" referring to a group that typically consider themselves separate nations, it's exactly the same for our Iwi, in past we all considered ourselves culturally distinct nations with regional dialects and cultural practices and the amalgamation of all of the above under the singular Māori umbrella is actually considered an aspect of "colonization" by many.
they are* a culturally distinct group I meant to say
The pre-māori moriori myth is widely discredited by academic consensus. The myth was perpetuated by Darwinian anthropologists who tried to prove that Chatham Island Moriori were neanderthalic descendants who were wiped out by a "more advanced race" (to in part scientifically validate cession of indigenous peoples by Europeans).
If you wanna hear one notable historian roasting the theory, read the first chapters of Penguin's History of New Zealand by Michael King.
@@ConquestofDread thanks for that. This is something I was wondering about recently-are the Maori all one group? Love your work!
The Cornish and Welsh are going to HATE this video
They are still there own culture today.
@@fun_ghoul what the hell?
@@fun_ghoul Welsh is taught in schools and road signs are duel language, so there's also that
@@fun_ghoul yes! Of course
Language makes culture
Why didn't I think of that?
When did BadMouse say anything about the Welsh? He was talking about the tribes in England specifically
@@fun_ghoul I watched the video again, and you're correct. But I'm assuming the tribes he included that inhabited present day Wales later became the Welsh. I don't know much about early British history.
Gonna have to disagree with "Every country that deposed its former colonizers just became another state." 12:42
Using just the examples you listed, the Khmer Rouge definitely carried out a program ethnic cleansing against the non-Khmer peoples of Cambodia, so much so that they attacked Viet communities in Vietnam in their fervor and prompted the Vietnamese invasion of Cambodia.
Same could be said of Uganda, where Idi Amin massacred Acholi and Lango ethnic groups for their political loyalties to the man he ousted Milton Otobe. Amin was even the chairman of the Organisation of African Unity (OAU), a Pan-Africanist group designed to promote solidarity among African states from 1975 until his ousting by Julius Nyerere in 1979 for trying to invade Tanzania.
And while we're on the topic of ethnic groups being persecuted for their political loyalties, real or perceived, Indonesia carried out a genocide of 1-4 million people in its own territory (to say nothing of East Timor) largely against ethnic Han Chinese who were perceived as Communists by the Suharto regime.
I'm not saying Revolutionary Nationalism doesn't exist, nor that it is not largely a positive force in the world, but I'd caution you to make a blanket statement as you did in the video with at least 3 pretty glaring examples of Nationalism gone wrong that weaken your case.
EDIT: Malaysian nationalists also literally ousted Singapore from the Federation of Malaysia in 1965 because they were worried about the growing influence of the Han minority in the country challenging the power of the dominant Malay parties, whose power was concentrated in the Han-majority city of Singapore.
All of the examples you’ve just referenced in terms of oppression/slaughter are nothing compared to European nationalism/colonialism even when adjusted for time. Revolutionary Nationalism >>>> Contemporary European Nationalism. It’s not even close this is just semantics.
@@evilkhamzat "As long as you murder less people than the last guy, you are in the clear." Got it.
@@evilkhamzat This is just like one of those weird family war things from the Balkans, where generations end up with dozens of murders over a century old slight.
Very good points. Also very curious that all of these things weren't worth mentioning but he still somehow felt the need to single out Israel as the single bad actor among these nationalist projects - make of that what you will.
@@fun_ghoul By that definition then, the Holocaust wouldn't constitute a genocide, as the central theme of the narrative demonizing Jews in Europe was that they were the masterminds of Communism that was supposed to be their political weapon to destroy gentile society through internationalism and race-mixing.
Ideological enemies of a regime are demonized on more than just the ideological level, they are also, to-a-one racialized and portrayed as barbarians to be tamed rather than equal humans.
I agree that this conversation is vastly more complex than that 3 hour debate would have us believe. I do know they're absolutely is some troubling elements in some of the black separatist discourse. I have seen first-hand black leftists say things like, " black blood is more pure than white blood because we did not cross breed with Neanderthals" and " homosexuality is an invention of white culture to feminize our black souljas"
Now people who hold these ideas are a very very very small minority without any institutional backing but it does still exists and we should be able to point out that these ideas are wrong and hurt our ability to move people to the left.
The Not Fucking Around Coalition is probably the most glaring example of black ethnonationalism in the U.S. at this point.
@@fun_ghoul lmao you're not even engaging with what they're saying, also genocide doesn't have a race prerequisite or rule, essentialising it to only being capable of being done by any race is fucking dumb
Reading Kwame Ture, George Jackson, and Frantz Fanon really informed my opinions on these things.
"As for white America, perhaps it can stop crying out against "black supremacy," "black nationalism," "racism in reverse," and begin facing reality. The reality is that this nation, from top to bottom, is racist; that racism is not primarily a problem of "human relation" but of an exploitation maintained - either actively or through silence - by the society as a whole." - Kwame Ture, What We Want
"I deny the existence of Black racism outright, by fiat I deny it. Too much Black blood has flowed between the chasm that separates the races. It's fundamentally unfair to expect the Black man to differentiate at a glance between the various kinds of White racists. What the apologists term 'Black racism' is either a healthy defense reflex on the part of the sincere Black partisan who is attempting to deal with the realistic problems of survival and elevation, or the racism of the government stooge organs." - George Jackson, Blood in My Eye
@Cool Cat "Genocide is when The Oppressed natives kill the white landowners"
Cool Cat 2021
@Cool Cat Which Black people are controlling a government and killing White people? Oh wait, that doesn't exist and it's a hypothetical you made up to justify your racist worldview and your refusal to engage with the real world. Take the advice of Amílcar Cabral: "Do not confuse the reality you live in with the ideas you have in your head." 😘
@Cool Cat Well yea, it's a hypothetical that's meant to box the opponent into defending the indefensible, it's also not real and never going to happen so I just won't engage with something you made up, and I'll also point to how it supports racist "Black people want to kill White people" narratives. I could just as easily flip it around and say you're in favor of perpetually keeping the colonized in a subjugated state. I don't think that would be fair or good faith, but those aren't principles you seem to be too concerned about
@Cool Cat It isn't ethnic cleansing!
Because in this MADE UP scenario of Vaush, they are killed not for their "Skin" but because they are occupiers who stole massive amount of wealth and land from the natives, and continue to subject them to this very day.
@Cool Cat and it doesn't matter what shade of crayon they are!
If a group of people subject 90% of the population through massive wealth and landownership, working class people have the right to deal with them in anyway they see fit.
no matter what part of the world they are in.
Welcome back comrade.
Debate doesn't help anything.
It's an engineered means to discern one winner while it specifically avoids "truth" or "facts" as being necessary.
It's specifically about whether or not you can trip up the opponent who you're debating.
It's not a discussion.
nice to see you back
Equating Black and white nationalism is like equating gay and straight pride. Both distinctions were unilaterally constructed in order to oppress. Since the oppression creates the categories, those combating the oppression are necessarily unified by the same constructed category.
This is really well put.
imagine thinking theirs straight pride being celebrated somewhere in north america. OH MY bad. It's true, everything that's not LGBTQIA+ is in itself a celebration of heteronormativity 😅I dropped my intersectional collectivism here for a sec.
"Equating Black and white nationalism is like equating gay and straight pride"
That's all you had to say. You do not realize how much better I understand black nationalism now.
Appreciate you showing Ireland as a 32-county Republic there. Tiocfaidh ar La!
Now I have "come out ye Black and Tans" in my head.
26 + 6
Vaush is so awful he brought you out of retirement.
Vaush's a genuine sociopath that's parading himself as a leftist. In the end I think he'll ultimately lead to the detriment of the left if people like him aren't fought back.
VDS moment
Vaush not only achieved left unity (against him), he also enables necromancy (to dunk on him).
@@Doctor_Straing_Strange "Anyone gainst our leader must be mentally ill!" - Totally not a cultist.
@@kazaddum2448 Yeah, claiming that a single streamer you may or may not agree with will lead to the detriment of the entire left is totally logical behaviour
i dont know where you got that linkin park ending vaush clip but it woke my kids up from me laughing so hard.
Thank you and welcome back.
The political debate in youtube is an effing disgrace. It has nothing to do with clear thought, honesty or search for truth, however unreachable that state might be, it s all about ego and repeating the same mantras ad nauseum to the circlejerk.
Repeating the same BS ad nauseum? like calling someone you don't like a pedophile for comparing consumption under modern capitalism to child porn?
@@kain6996 yes exactly like that. That’s why it is aggravating that vaush fans are doing the exact same thing everybody does to him. They’re deliberately misinterpreting the point and being extremely, EXTREMELY reductive. They basically say. PF is in favor of self determination. A self determining group could commit genocide. Therefor PF is in favor of genocide.
Agree. Could not word it any better than you. There's a reason why I've been slowly distancing myself from political yotubers, whether they're right wing or left wing.
Holy crap a new video!? Much love mate!
Much love 🕉️♥️ good video
In this video, i drop an n-bomb. Biiiig one; hard 'R'. I did this to show my interlocutors that their language doesn't impress me, that their slurs don't frighten or disarm me. You can see from their reactions that it worked - they were clearly taken aback. It was a power over which I am entirely unashamed of, but I understand how that language might have upset some of you.
This is an example of what i would call an 'invocation of a slur's power for good', but that's a subjective judgement. I invite you all to discuss this in the comments, critically or otherwise!
Imagine still obsessing over a point that Vaush himself walked back on. Given you want to seperate the races tho, maybe there's a reason you obsess over using the N-Word?🤔
@@zillafire101 angry and white
@@fun_ghoul super angry and really white
@@andrewthen8998 Is that what you are?
What movie are those clips of Irish Republicans from? I want to watch it.
Edit: Never mind figured it out. The Wind That Shakes the Barley.
15:27 This dude brings up slave diamonds to justify buying CP all the time it's insane. There's a difference between buying a slave diamond not knowing it was produced by a slave and knowingly buying a video of said slave mining the diamonds for your own purposes. Can't believe this dude has a platform
Dude, it's a comparison to show how we're having a double standard as a society in that regard. No reasonable person is willing to protect CP, and his point is that we shouldn't be willing to accept slave like working conditions in Africa and Asia either because they are so similar. It's not a perfect comparison, but it should be pretty clear that this is about bringing more attention to the abuse these workers have to endure simply to survive
I won't claim equivalence, but there are a lot of common threads here experienced in the pseudo-colonised regions of the UK (the communists with their newspapers at the miners strikes of the 80s came to mind straight away). This is something that could be worth exploring as a potential vector for solidarity.
Apt title. A lot of breadtube is "baby's first," but hopefully people use it as a stepping stone to finding out more.
Unfortunately many don't as I discovered recently :(
The problem is many of them are comfortable with the current system, and are neither anarchist or ML's, and are just a different brand of shitlib
@@alonsoarana5307 shitlibs in ushanka hats
I totally get that. I unsubscribed from most breadtubers almost a year ago now and I feel my beliefs are becoming stronger and better thought through because of it
@@anarchistmugwump9137 the algorithm is part of the problem
Baby leftism is a fantastic term for this phenomenon
Kinda sounds like a rapper that focuses on worker solidarity.
@@johnjohnson8575 lmao
Baby Leftist and his homie Lil Lenin lol
>call others baby leftists for being ultras
>proceeds to be an anarchist after 18 yo lol
Great video, thanks for this!
I remember the first time I heard someone say they desired a space where only black people were allowed; a space them to discuss reparations and liberation where only those who had suffered the affects of slavery and racism would be permitted.
My initial reaction was "that's racist". It took some time, but I eventually saw where they were coming from. This was a discussion that people felt vulnerable having, and it didn't concern me at all.
So, whether it's racist or not, how do we make this happen and where? That's the controversy, not whether it's racist or whether black people do deserve it. This video in the end is a red herring, and so is your comment.
@@Specopleader The fact that you think anything on this video or corresponding thread is meant to distract YOU, should tell anyone actually interested in learning all they need to know.
I suppose the way they word it is what bothers people the most, I mean to me it comes off as a sort of "I"m going to do to you what you did to us" as if two wrongs will make a right, and I say that as someone who agrees they should have a space to talk about these things without the input of chauvinistic oppressors. I guess I really don't like blanket statements no matter how correct they are. ah the problem of Statistical likelihood strikes again...
@@Specopleader of course they deserve a space to discuss issues that they face without the input of chauvinistic oppressors. And white people (though I loath to sound like race is anything more then a social construct) are statistically likely to be chauvinistic and/or oppressors.
@@crasher925 No one is saying they're going to do what imperialism did to them though lol. What they're saying is if they're not the sole leaders on the discussions or liberation, than it's not really liberation is it?
Yeah, like many leftists, vaush looks at how things should be instead of the way things are. Integration doesn't automatically eliminate racism. I mean the data on systemic racism in the justice system irrefutably proves that.
well here i would say that the systemic racism itself is what makes it not actually be intergration, you need to fix the issues within the system to fix that racism, cause racism doesnt dissapear with only whites being there or only asians or blacks, they are just gonna find other things to differenciate each other beteween if the core issue in generation of wealth theres tied to systematic oppression isnt fixed. for example irish people today we would call them white, they didnt always used to be white, so whos to say that they wouldnt become lesser people or someone else, if all non-white people are removed from England, or if all white and asian people are removed from africa and all blacks and white in asia. if intergration isnt the way, youre gonna end up with more and more fractured people by defenition. which is kinda shit, and also kinda the exact same path as facism
@@catboynestormakhno2694 "they didnt always used to be white" yes they did
@@green2498 race is a social construct
Just like any other social construct it's meaning has shifted through the times, Irish people didn't used to get seen as white people, it's literally the justification Brits came up with to treat them the way they did
So yes Irish people haven't always been seen a white and therefore not always been white
Learn at least a little history before you speak about it
@@catboynestormakhno2694 in america the irish were always seen as white, i don't know about britain though i would suspect that at best the "irish weren't white" idea was the domain of a minority of anthropologists, open to being shown otherwise though
@@green2498 what does that matter with my original comment tho
It's about how if you just change a unit within a system without changing the system, that it'll still basically have the same outcome. Which is where my issue with all this comes from, it's a very superficial idea that integration doesn't work.
It lacks the reasoning behind which is that many of the systems we live under enjoy having someone they can treat like an outgroup for profit, and that issue itself won't be solved by stopping immigration, but it'll be focused on others instead
do you not realise that the last clip is literally vaush`s position, like 1 to 1?
no because white leftist just like to argue with other white leftist about what's best for people of other races. this whole video was such a head-empty take.
@Ty The Guy badmouse is saying you shouldn't lecture other groups that you seemingly don't understand, and Vaush is saying he knows what's best for minority communities because he has a fucking sociology degree. How you came to your conclusion is just baffling.
Vaush deserves to be fucking lectured on a regular basis, because every other time he opens his mouth, he completely derails the discourse with his leaping reactionary takes. Then, everyone has to try and get him to understand, all while his fans gang up on the ones critical of him. When he finally comes around to things, he's already left a wake of destruction. He's not helping any kind of movement, he's only a constant fucking nuisance to them.
@@themenagerie5247 btw white people should speak up and say that we shouldn't lecture groups that we don't really understand.
And don't act like Vaush and his audience is above fighting other leftists. Are you saying we should just not butt-heads with Vaush, but allow him to constantly badger other leftists about strategy?
@@omnibusprimephd7914 vaushs whole point in this debate is ethnic cleansing is bad. How anyone could think flowers is right is baffling.
@@omnibusprimephd7914 doesn't take any kind of degree to know that ethnic cleansing is inexcusable, that knowledge is free.
Vaush has always used the hyperbolic to reinforce his points nothing new here.
Should ppl ethnically cleanse their colonizers? This Is a yes or no question and the inability to answer it telling
@@fun_ghoul yes
@@fun_ghoul also I love how you equate you can’t committ genocide with oppressed ppl have no say 😂
@@fun_ghoul 😂 what does white mean in parentheses?
@@fun_ghoul If liberation means the replication of oppression by a different group then it's not liberation. The founding of America is proof of this.
Removing your oppressors and killing random people aren't the same.
Love to see you back, man!
ah man this just made me remember a repressed memory of this time a vaush stan told me that I was tokenizing myself as a "native mystic trope" bc I said ecologically sound land husbandry is important to me
Jesus Christ...
i was with you until "ecologically sound land husbandry". those are four words that do not make sense in a row
@@duskpede5146 what is your confusion? would be happy to explain
@@elen5871 i don't know what any of those words mean in this context
@@duskpede5146 o just like
better land management practices. protecting the water. not planting giant fields of monoculture crops that deplete the topsoil. returning to old ways of land management that helped mitigate shit like the massive wildfires that happen every summer now. the stuff that we see studies on weekly now where it's like "oh yeah. actually, natives were doing a bang up job of doing (x), it wasn't just some weird accident of nature that caused that."
This is what I understand, Professor Flowers position is that the harm done onto the colonized people is so great that any action done by the colonized in an effort to decolonize themselves would be justified. It appears that Vaushs issue with this is that this would include extremes such as the removal of the white people from their communities which he considers genocide . Flowers does say that she wouldn’t like it if the colonized people were to decide that removing white people is their solution but says that she has no right to say that they shouldn’t. I understand that she wouldn’t like it if the colonized went through with the removal but her being unwilling to say that they can’t do that is what enables potential bad behavior. I believe that Vaush said in that debate that there isn’t a huge problem of colonized coming together to genocide the white man. His main critique is that Professor Flowers ideology enables the genocide of a racial group by justification of the harm done by colonizers. If Professor Flowers didn’t conflate the white race and the colonizers that came to America, I’d probably be more on board with her. This is my interpretation of the the positions held by Professor Flowers and Vaush on this subject. There is this very core ideological problem with Professor Flowers and Bad Mouse that I have found. Being that their ideas cannot be challenged by those who don’t have identities that are being negatively affected by the subjects at hand. This leads to the message that those who don’t have these identities should listen to people with those identities and accept whatever they have to say. I feel like it’s hypocritical to accuse dogmatism when the ending message to all of this is to say “shut up and accept what I have to say”.
@@fun_ghoul take a look in the mirror
@@fun_ghoul so are you just gonna complain that the person agrees with Vaush?
Suppose Vaush is correct, then agreeing with him would just be the correct position to have.
It seems like you don’t think Vaush was correct and because of that you want to name call anyone who disagrees with you as dogmatic or tribalistic rather than engaging with the actual arguments being made.
@@pragmaticpolitics1413 when you can't attack the idea you attack the person.
Thanks, I don't think I'd be able to say it as clearly as you just did.
What's funny to me....is I am someone who actually is from the African continent who lived in Zimbabwe when the...."decolonising" happened in tje 2000s....and I can tell you that none of the fucks who are talking blithely about ethnic cleansing and downplaying it don't actually want to talk to people like me because I disagree with their absolute dogshit takes about what people "have a right to do" to other people.
I would like him better if he was more curious and actually listened to his guests.
Yea unfortunately he only has two modes; combative against leftists and rw's he loathes and super nice and cordial with leftists he likes but has mild disagreements with.
Why should he listen to someone who's ok with ethnic cleansing?
@@fun_ghoul Caveman ugah bugah
@@xpropriation8505 No one was okay with ethnic cleansing.
@@fun_ghoul I don't even know what you are talking about and I don't care.
This situation seems to have sparked from the fact that Prof. Flowers didn't explicitly say she was against ethnic cleansing. She was asked several times, and each time she would pivot away and refuse to answer, which is fairly common for people who are aware of how bad their positions sound.
Now maybe it's possible that Prof. Flowers is just tired of being berated by people trying to "gatcha" her and decided to not answer for that reason. If that is the case, she was at best not speaking in good faith and is at least partly to blame for misunderstandings that resulted. However, she did the same thing in a later discussion with Dr.HeemedOut, which leads me to suspect she isn't anti-ethnic cleansing... I think this is reactionary and well deserving of criticism
Do you think this channel owner actually cares about what you said?
@@jl9062 No, but I guess you did
@@kindredspirit9703 I genuinely don't think Prof Flowers had/has a good grasp of what ethnic cleansing or genocide can mean or how it can come about. To also boil down the colonisers as a racial group (she was chucking about white people) is beyond stupid. Don't get me wrong I don't think she is a bad person and I think Vaush laid on the gotcha a bit heavy but her way of thinking is frankly dangerous and can be used to excuse a whole load of destructive behaviour.
She openly said in her own response to the debate that she had no intention of talking to him in good faith on actual political issues because she didn’t think he deserved it, and wouldn’t have even engaged the subject of his comparison between black nationalist and Nazis didn’t just happen to set her off. She isn’t actually a black nationalist at all, and only intended to talk about interpersonal drama between her and Vaush because that’s what they’d agreed to, so she didn’t prepare for anything else
@@nykcarnsew2238 I'll admit I'm not an expert on Black Nationalism, but from the little research I've done it seems like forming ethnostates is sometimes a goal for Black Separatists (a distinct group from Black Nationalists), and ethnostates were what Vaush was against.
Literally all that was needed was for both of them to agree that ethnic cleansing and ethnostates are bad. This shouldn't require any preparation
he'sssss back!!!!!
Honestly, a huge problem with civil war education in the US is the sort of sheep dogged in belief that integration was the only moral way to move on from slavery in the US. I am all for racial integration and cultural integration, I love being surrounded by cultures of all kinds, it gives me a lot to learn about. However, I do understand that this is always a looming threat to the non-dominant cultures and I could easily see why people of their own culture would want to self govern.
This is partially why I really wish people understood secession from a country in a context other than the Confederacy. If any of the native american tribes wanted to totally cut ties with the US I feel like it should entirely be within their right to do so. If a region, like the pacific northwest, decided the federal government wasn't doing enough to protect them from climate change, I think it makes sense to support an independence movement.
Not every reason for secession is a good one and the confederacy exemplifies secession for the wrong reasons, however, I do think generally people should be able to govern themselves if they want. Cultural lines are not always or even mostly divided by race, and people of one race in one area of the same country may be very different culturally from people of the same race in a different area of the same country. When you force a group to be governed by a system that they do not have control over, you are using force to rob them of their autonomy. This applies to all groups of people, and should be avoided in basically all cases except in cases where the groups are actively exploiting or harming other people.
@@fun_ghoul mmmh. nah. whiteskin ain’t enough for that. if someone’s hoarding shit though, they’re on their own
to be fair though, many secessionist movements are for the creation of a different state with a different ethnic identity, rather than a secession based on anarchist principles. it's a component of the problem many leftists have with Israel the state, because in it's day it was seen as a secessionary movement for the safety of a race. now however, it's clear that it's an ethnostate that abuses the rights of other minorities. independence itself is to be lauded, but we need to be careful to not support liberation struggles that are statist in principle, lest we support another Israel. a "people" is a more vague concept than most would like to admit, and most of these liberatory struggles aren't anarchist in nature, but merely a neophyte nation that uses race as justification for domination and hierarchy. that's why while i have no love for the hierarchy of the state, i also recognize that there are also tribal actor's with tyrannical ends. then again, many of them just start casino's. TLDR: it's my opinion that historically anarchists supporting national liberation movements leads to recreating the state, rather than creating anarchy.
Natives for the most part did not form a "state"
Gotta disagree. The other options besides integration and segregation for ex-enslaved-people after the Civil War were give part of the US to them as reparations, which would never fly and made the Union's efforts to get it back useless, or ship them back to Africa wholesale, which is what many winats will suggest as "peaceful ethnic cleansing" and would essentially solidify the US as a whites-only nation by law.
BAH GAWD! THAT'S BADMOUSE'S MUSIC! HE'S GOT A CHAIR!
And Vaush beats him anyway and gives him a package piledriver on the apron.
Lol
@@MasterAdam100 BADMOUSE THROWS VAUSH INTO THE SPANISH ANNOUNCER'S TABLE, MY GOD!
I'd similarly look at the nationalism of Wales which unlike England is largely left leaning, voting in a left welsh government for the past 20 years
Also Scottish nationalism. There’s also Catalonian nationalism which is mainly left wing as well. It’s also worth noting that most socialist movements that happen in the third world tend to take a nationalistic stance as well, but it’s left wing. Just look at Luna Oi!’s channel where she discusses Vietnam, a socialist country.
Nationalism is still very cringe though this video is just more understanding of minority nationalism
@@guyfauks2576 Nationalism to unite oppressed groups to overthrow the imperialist forces in their country isn't cringe. I can tell you're quite young and I think you should research more on revolutionary Nationalism. It's not about being anti-immigration, it's about the people of a country taking power and overthrowing capitalism and imperialism. Systems that oppress them and were forced on them. That's left wing nationalism
@@TheQueen-sw4th ok cool still not nationalist
@@guyfauks2576 That is nationalism. Revolutionary nationalism
It's great to see a new video from you, I was just thinking about this channel literally last night
This is excellent. Please do more like this.
im glad your posting again because you are where my entire leftisst journey began.
hopefully you start your enlightened centrist journey soon. Rooting for you fam!
@@fun_ghoul ewwww no fuck no blegh… definitely not a Vaush fan… how dare you sir… Im a simple man who enjoys watching Lefty in-fighting is all.
@@christopherjohnson9167 I appreciate the genuine disgust.
@@GUILLOTINE_GANG thank you comrade 🙏
Holy shit welcome back badmouse!
19:20 This section about colonialism digging it's own grave comes from Fanon, right?
Whenever I see V**sh's face in my recommends I usually have to tell TH-cam to do one but I was just glad to see you upload something.
Glad to see you active again!
I do think Vaush ignored a lot of nuance and definitely agree that both him and Prof. Flowers weren't really making good points, which made the debate frustrating. However I don't think that Vaush is saying "just act like colonialism never happened" he's asking a couple things. Firstly how one can effectively "de-colonize" a society wherein the group which originally colonized has integrated itself into the society in such a extent that suddenly removing all members related to that group would be damaging? And secondly, how can we justify holding a person accountable for the crimes people who came generations before them solely because of some geniological if not material heritage? He doesn't put these across in the best way to be sure. But I don't think these are questions that can simply be brushed aside with "let colonized people decide" when there's little indication that the people in counties that had been colonized would have some kind of grand, unanimous, all wise solution to these issues.
This is fair criticism
Exactly.
the debate was bad and frustrating because Vaush was fully commited not to learn or understand a single thing and just try to paint Flowers as an anti white racist come hell or high water, obviously this wasn't going to bring out the best in her. There's lots of answers to these questions that can be found if you care to look, much ink has been spilled on this subject, it's been constantly debated by academics for decades. If he doesn't know anything about decolonization then where does he get off speaking with authority on the subject? Jumping to comparing people with nazis? This should have been a learning opportunity, instead he argued blindly against something he did not understand and slandered a comrade and a liberatory ideology in the eyes of his followers
@trapd00rspider that's a fair point. When it comes to native communities being given self rule and self determination I could see building to that place.
You say that people need to "give the house back" when they find out the land was stolen long ago. But also say that it's not about making all white people go back to Europe etc. So what does giving the house back look like in your view?
@Parker that's an awfully broad "you" there. I think this is where the accusations of bigotry come in. We have a very nebulous "you" vs the colonized however we're defining that.
Glad to see this post.
🖤💜💙💚💙💜🖤
Its so hard to see her get spoken over
vaush speaks in the language of gotchas
Glad to see BadMouse join the Anti-Vaushite coalition💕
Thus bringing him to more people's attention, and feeding the algorithm in his favor. Frustrating.
You are probably the only Breadtuber worse than Vaush so shut up
@@bobbie3713 Silence Vaushite!
I don't think its productive to describe yourself as an "anti vaushite" i feel like thats just playing into the dumb very online debate bro game, be an anti colonialist instead. 😎
Someone else I'd like to see more from!
What was the movie that had clips in of Michael Collins and the IRA fighting the Black and Tans?
I believe its 'the wind that shakes the barley'
@@carlos_herrera cheers
Another great example are the Greenlandic Inuit, who are indigenous to Greenland in spite of actually having arrived *after* the Vikings, because of the same reasons you listed here.
I don’t know if I understand what he’s trying to say, people become indigenous by being oppressed?
@@coppermoth6069 Essentially yeah lol, more specifically by coming before whoever the oppressor nation is
@@terrancewood9322 so they Inuit who arrived after the Vikings, would they be indigenous or would the Vikings who arrived before them be indigenous?
Good to see you comrade
Great video.
Mashallah, Hakim
happy upcoming spooky month 👻👻
Habibi
When are you debating Vaush by the way?
What's your take on The Holodomor and what transpired in that period?
@@fun_ghoul Glad you find it funny mate. What exactly about it tickles you?
Welcome back, thank you for the vid!
WHAAAAAAAAAAT? HE'S BACK?
Holy shit coming back swinging on these opportunists and settlers
LARP.
@@Markunator Mayo mad. I repeat, mayo mad. Fragility levels are through the roof.
@Markus Sarén you have a playlist of movie trailers for bad films, I can smell your pit stains.
What a confusing notification, but hell yeah I am here for this!
Whaaat, new Badmouse!
Regarding the ethinc validation, Germany still has (or used to have) a rule that ethnic Germans have a claim to German statehood, even if they haven't lived in Germany for centurys.
I would be kind of shocked if this were the case. Our genetics, being one of the countries in the middle, are incredibly messy. Marking someone out as “German” is a hard thing to do. We took back a lot of Volga Germans because they were deported from the USSR and a lot of Jewish Germans for obvious reasons. But considering most white Americans are part German, I sort of doubt they could just stroll in and say they want to come home now. Furthest I have seen is 2 generations gap, not “centuries”.
I'm glad you're back comrade, it's been a long while and this has legitimately brought a tear to my eye, because your contribution to education matters in these times.
What contributions? Justifying racial segregation?
@@jakublutek9361 Dude vaush is not gonna fuck you.
@@babelfish9948 this is the exact same argument incels used when people defended feminism lol
@@_doop8257 He isn't gonna fuck you either, well... if you are under 16 maybe you have a chance with vaush.
@@babelfish9948 he was right.
"I must have some based fucking positions if people have to do shit like this to even attempt to optically pretend to debunk me."
your bad faith comments only reinforce my beliefs lol
Your (?) graphics work with the maps and such is top notch, more professional than a lot of the stuff on TV. If you get nauseous with internet politics again I hope you have other outlets to make animated infographics for! All the substance of the video is good too, lol
it's very likely their own. it's his profession now
Exactly this
i was onboard for ~5/6ths of this comment
Hello BadMouse, happy to see another video.
When I was poor they called me desparete when I was rich they called me a hyppocrite.
@@fun_ghoul What does this even mean
@@fun_ghoul Capitalists, assumably?
The woman from Tiktok was talking about how it was better before Black and White people integrated. NOT that black people are still marginalized thru systemic oppression but that integration in it if itself was a BAD thing.
And they have a point, black communities having black doctors, shops, banks etc and an own economy would have protected that community somewhat from the discrimination they face in every aspect of life within integrated society .. From housing discrimination to discrimination in health care.. Integration in many ways just benefited white society , financially .. Black people go to white schools with Western propaganda, buy mostly from white companies while black businesses struggle just to name two things. There is no equal exchange of capital .. It's mostly a one way street, whereas If black people had to develop their own businesses, schools, financial institutions, the big difference in generation wealth wouldn't be, well, as broad as it is now. There would be more space to learn about black history, which often was more anti capitalists for example. White people didn't move into black neighborhood, and still doesn't on the whole.. Black neighborhoods are now just taken over ..
From that perspective, I somewhat agree. Doesn't mean that interactions between white and black would be prohibited or discouraged. But whiteness listens to capital and power, without those two things.. There is no respect. Segregated black societies were building a lot by themselves and were often sabotaged by racist white people in the 20th century.
Just like white society looks down on poor white people.. It's not whiteness they have an issue with in that example, but the lack of power they look down on..which is implied when whiteness perceives black people because well integration gave whiteness more power over black destinies. And that's not even mentioning the extra generational trauma that results from being non white in a white country.
Well schools in America are more segregated then they were in the '60s so...
I've had a handful of conversations with members of Ian's fanbase and it's almost weird how often little bits of rhetoric end up being repeated verbatim. "I became a Vaush fan because I heard so many awful things about him but then I listened to them and found out they weren't true" but then no effort is made to actually explain what was compelling about him otherwise.
It's as you say, an immensely hollow vortex where all where important and pressing topics end up becoming a means of talking about what Vaush's relationship is or isn't to them and spreading his brand as a consequence.
If I may, as someone who likes but does not love the man, I think the issue is, in part at least, that there is so much vitriol towards him that Vaush's fans feel the need to constantly defend him, especially because a lot of Left Wing people, including in this very comment section, name them as shitlibs in ushankas for liking him. It isn't just a cult of personality or a hollow defence of the man, on his server there's a pretty consistent discussion of various Left Wing ideas, many of which are contradictory to his own, and the provision of Left Wing literature, but the reason why it may seem to outsiders that it's all just this personality cult is because those who follow Vaush feel the need to constantly be on the defensive, and thus can rarely open up to discuss Leftism without the context of Vaush, especially because a lot of Leftists they talk to will, upon hearing that they like him, dismiss them as Liberal do-nothings.
It is itself sectarian, and is a reaction to secctarianism.
@@eldradulthran6482 That's great and everything but you also just spent a lot of time not giving any concrete reasons as to why he's worth a fuck.
Also, for the record "I like the guy but wouldn't call myself a fan" is another piece of rhetoric which pops up to the point where it begins to feel rehearsed.
@@eugenewatson1456 I mean..it's kind of self-evident, isn't it? Vaush is a lot of things, but a light version of all of it. A socialist, but only barely, a progressive, but not "hyperwoke", edgy, but not quite 4chan, ... That's a reasonable compromise for a lot of people that would otherwise not want to associate with the more radical aspects of those things. If you're further left than Vaush, he's not worth a fuck for you, though I guess you could still consider him to be a part of the pipeline to the left.
@@wydiwy I mean, if he's going around saying the sort of shit highlighted in the video above, then no, he's not a great entry point.
@@eugenewatson1456 So then your next move, you being a responsible , honest and critical human, is to take the counterfactual side and determine whether or not the things highlighted in the video are accurate representations because deceptive editing is a thing we are all aware of and vigilant for. Right?
Vaush be doing his "taxes" these days.
Welcome back comrade, nice to see a new video by you.
As a Pakistani, I can't help but try to apply Vaush's argument to the colonisation of the sub-continent. We didn't really have a coherent nationstate across the whole land (there were empires over us, certainly, but they didn't operate the same way) and are quite ethnically diverse from area to area much like the old Americas. So, does that justify the British in keeping our land after they took it away just because it's too complex to parse out who it belongs to in a precise manner?
Am I misunderstanding his argument here or is it really that dogshit?
At no point did he justify it. He supports emancipatory nationalism but not ethnostates
As far as I understood him, his idea would be to democratize Pakistan and give power to the oppressed people, but allow British people to stay in the country.
@@martinn.6082 He appears to harbour the usual half-measure attitude to dismantling class hierarchies, then. Historical context for you:
Pakistan was democratised under British rule (disastrously. They literally gave different religious groups different voting weightage to make us fight each other: "divide and conquer"). Outside of voting, any attempt to oust the British ruling class by our people's movements led to things like the Amritsar massacre. There was no democratic way of dismantling the ownership structure (and arguably it still hasn't been dismantled because they left when they had already bled it dry). Look at the situation in South Africa where black proletarians live among a white ownership class (the fine people that produced such gems as Elon Musk). It would result in something like that.
I can't help but think a lot of Vaush's audience talks a big game about dismantling class hierarchies until there are people of colour in charge of doing so. Not any one race, but people of colour in general. It really smacks of some ingrained racial biases without any historical perspective on these issues. More often than not, this all devolves into an argument about white people's feelings about an issue rather than practical resolution.
@@rawalshadab3812 again, you're also not saying what your solution is. I'd even agree to remove all British descendants from positions of power, politically, economically and spiritually. Redistribute the land and resources.
But would you want them out anyway, even if they are poor and have as much power as anybody else? That's the, very theoretical, question.
@@martinn.6082 Then I suppose we're in agreement.
To me though, I wouldn't need to remove everyone from their positions in certain cases (although more on those who need to be "removed" below). I would rearrange the functions of the government.
You see, a lot of our modern governments are arranged to accommodate and justify the ownership classes rulership. Primarily, if you change the mode of operation of the government (change from the standard top down model to a progressive bottom up set of functions), you don't even have to change the race of people in positions. You change the power relations entirely in some cases. But, historically, that is never done peacefully or without resistance.
However, HERE'S the rub: Some people in colonised countries only exist as a sort of bureaucracy for the ruling class. These people would HAVE to go. They are only in the country because they own stolen land/resources or support such acquisitions. This isn't everyone and it isn't even close to the majority (far from it, in fact some of these people may even be of "oppressed" groups working in the same profession/function). But they are basically there to create inequality and justify it. Their careers would either have to be made obsolete or they would be forced to leave.
I think a point is being missed here. Vaush was mainly criticizing Flowers effectively advocating that colonized people should be able to create ethnostates if they want. I think free association is perfectly valid, that no one should be forced to associate with those they don't want to. But I don't think people should be purged from countries because they have the wrong skin color.
No decolonizer think that people should be purged from anywhere. Period.
That's just a debate bro hypothetical.
You go down the slippery slope from prof Flower's "colonized People should have the right to self determination" via ethnostates and separatism to genocide.
But there is no slope. The slope is in the debate bro's head. Not in reality.
The problem with this is that opposing hypothetical future transgressions of where certain movements might lead invariably supports the very real current transgression of the oppressive systems keeping them down. When people build genocidal ethnostates, we oppose them. While they don't ... just don't?
My understanding of the argument can be boiled down to:
Vaush
-Colonialism = bad.
-Essentiallising 'race' = bad.
-Redressing colonialism by essentiallising 'race' = probably bad.
-Redressing colonialism (many generations after the colonising) in multicultural nations = extremely complicated.
-Not denying methods of ethnic cleansing as suitable ways of dealing with colonialism = very bad.
PF
-Colonialism = bad.
-The rest of that stuff... I dunno... Might be fine... Depends on what oppressed people want.
I have really tried hard to understand the outrage over Vaush's argument with PF. While I agree that he didn't conduct himself as well as he could have (a common issue with him), his arguments seem absolutely sound to me. The arguments against don't appear to address his arguments, so much as the perception of "ignorant white liberal man argues against decolonisation with black leftist woman". A perception which I see as deeply flawed and overtly focused on aesthetics rather than the ideas being discussed.
I am not a Vaush fan anymore than I am a BadMouse/Curio/Thought Slime/et al fan. Vaush can be highly cringe at times, but I am highly uncomfortable with the outraged hand waving way that a decent chunk of the online left respond to Vaush in cases like this. In the same way that I am highly uncomfortable with the way Vaush hand waves so many other online leftists.
I think critiques of bad arguments need to focus on those arguments, not the people making them as seems to be the case with this issue.
Perhaps I am still missing something that I have a huge blind spot to, or maybe I'm too much of a debatebro personality to "get it".
I really try to address my areas of ignorance (which are numerous) but I just can't see how this is one of them.
@@seanocd - if you want to take another 10 hour-ish take on this, check out TH-camr President Sunday. He analyzes the debate, the aftermath, made an interview with prof Flowers.
@@Sveggo I am so tired of entertaining the Vaush bad takes on the PF discussion. However I feel I owe it a few more hours of my life to try and understand the position, so I'll check it out.
Hopefully President Sunday has more to say than the dozen or so "Vaush-the-white doesn't understand anti-colonialism" takes I have already seen which almost completely ignore the actual disagreement that the original discussion was focused on.
Cheers.
HE'S BACK
13:10
Ireland actually has a law of return just like Israel's. Mexico has a smilar law, not to mention colonizing countries like Germany, Denmark, and Italy.
I dunno if I'm just slow, but following your train of thought gave me whiplash. I could not explain your criticisms of that debate.
The best I can do is say you were disappointed that Vaush didn't engage with Prof Flowers ideas. Then you ran off on to critcising leftists streamers for making large incomes.
So what do you think Prof Flowers ideas were? You didn't describe them. Therefore I don't know how Vaush could have better engaged with them.
So could you convey your ideas better?
Funny how he came scurrying out of retirement to make a video about one of these large income streamers. Tankies wouldn't be able to feed themselves if it wasn't for the wake content creators they seem to hate leave for them to leech off.
yeah this video is just a very well edited attempt at bashing a strawman
@@fun_ghoul that's exactly it. Well done for writing that in what I assume is crayon
@@fun_ghoul Funny how you resort to a quick insult but can't really respond their question
Well from watching the video Vaush lumps black nationalism with white nationalism, uses arguments that essentially boil down to a zero sum game. Is heavily speculative with regards to a zero sum game, in that indigenous or oppressed people will engage in ethnic cleansing against white people once they become powerful or stop being oppressed. He didn't as far as I know cite any examples. And has a US centric view of other people's cultures. Not understanding why an oppressed group would want to preserve their culture. Or believing they want to preserve all aspects of their culture. There is also the matter of his response video which he did drunk.
what if we kissed in the comments of badmouse’s new video and we both thought vaush was a massive cringlelord 😳💖
👉👈😳
haha......unless
Good video
Glad to see you’re back, even if just for a video ❤️
This is a very thoughtful and interesting video. But I have no idea what it has to do with the main issue, which was Flowers (and her defenders) saying ethnic cleansing was justified in some cases. Thats the central contention. You didn’t need to convince me that decolonization is a good thing, that its understood. Even Vaush said that he supported decolonization and that he knows it doesn’t it entail genocide and ethnic cleansing, specially bc indigenous ppl themselves were telling flowers she was making their position look bad. Why did she choose to die in that very stupid and immoral hill?
I just feel like we are having two different conversations. One side is arguing that decolonization is good and doesn’t entail genocide (which duh we knpw lol) and the other is arguing that saying ethnic cleansing is sometimes ok shows a deep misunderstanding of morality and marxism, and doesn’t even represent what most decolonization advocates want.
@@fun_ghoul thats a completely meaningless platitude, sorry. Its a thought-terminating cliché. If you think ethnic cleansing is justified at least have the balls to say it (chances are you don’t even believe that, you are just posturing)
Lol what
@@fun_ghoul how exactly do you imagine decolonization being implemented without any cooperation from the "colonizers"? Lol
This misrepresentation keeps getting brought up over and over, and it's just patently stupid. Flowers never once said ethnic cleansing was justified. All she and others have said is that colonizers don't get to dictate to the colonized how they're allowed to do decolonization; especially while they're still in a position of oppressing those colonized peoples.
If colonizers are so concerned about decolonization being done "wrong", about being killed in an uprising, then the best thing they could do is to simply fuck off out of their colonies; and not put colonized peoples in a position where their only real choice is between enduring ongoing oppression and committing violent revolution.
But that's not likely to ever happen, since colonizers have never relinquished their colonies without violence.
@@EphemeralTao What colonizers do you mean? What colonies are they gonna guck off to? In the video she equates colonizers with just being white people. Do they not get to dictate that decolonization not be done through deporting an entire race of people?
What an excellent video. As a black person I am always happy to see white allies actually understanding our side on subjects like these
@Midas Because it‘s relevant to the conversation. This video is about black people and I am saying I feel understood.
@Midas you clearly didn’t understand the message of the video
@Midas Commies? Lol, you must be extremely american.
@@Silvannetwork but most black people disagree with you, and bad mouse agrees with you because as a posh british guilt swimmer, he is removed from struggling for himself. "Allies" are basically people who can never be allies, because who knows what they are in it for.
Don't use the term "allies", use the term comrades.
Working class whites have a class interest in supporting the democratic and progressive aspects of black nationalism, as the bourgeois democratic and bourgeois progressive struggle advances the class struggle.
So , you're alive
Holy fucking shit. Is Bad Mouse alive?!
th-cam.com/video/PUQXPVevXvI/w-d-xo.html Here's his response.
About the "(not-A -> not-A) =/= (not-A -> B)"-thing. In the context of the debate I suppose that would be A="Vaush's prefered method of decolonisation" and B="ethnic cleansing", right?
In the abstract this would be correct ofc. In the specific context of the 3h+ debate however, the issue was not that Prof. Flowers simply stated not-A and Vaush immediately ran with "therefore B", but rather that Vaush was _repreatedly_ probing her whether _her definition_ of "right to self-determination" in principle allowed for the inclusion of B or not, i.e. whether Prof. Flowers condemns B _in spite of_ her belief in not-A.
However since her response to being asked about B repeatedly, was simply to restate not-A - rather than forwardly stating not-B - that then does raise some serious questions after a while, even if she never endorsed B outright.
@@fun_ghoul But we're talking about the context of a debate in which B did exist, dummy. She was confronted with B and replied "That would be up to what the colonized choose."
@@fun_ghoul I see, the famed "debate tactics".
No, you're right, there was absolutely no opportunity during a 3h+ debate for Flowers to qualify that her notion of "right to self-determination" excludes ethnic cleansing..
Also, censoring "Vaush"? K..
@@fun_ghoul Nice pivot clown lmao
@@fun_ghoul Unironically yes.
A fairly significant amount of people - in large part young, terminally online white men admittedly - have been pulled further towards the Left thanks to people like Vaush.
You might not like this kind of debate format, and that's fine, it's not for everyone. But the medium has been unquestionably effective on certain demographics. The meteoric rise of the online-Right certainly banked on it during the 2010s.
And to preempt the inevitable response that "those kinds of people are not worth courting": Nobody is asking _everyone_ to empathize with them or join in with Vaush's line of work.
But at least don't stand in the way of those who do want to make and consume this medium; not for their sake per se, but as a matter of strategic self-interest for the Left:
Every alienated white guy who gets presumptively rejected by the Left is one left for the Right to gladly swoop up. Each one we dismiss out of hand is a potential fascist you might have to face on the streets one day.
The political persuasion of massive numbers of white people is indispensible to the Left's success in the West given the hegemonic white majority. You can sneeze at that all you want but it's true.
Vaush may not be perfect, but it is most certainly a net positive to have his kind of content around rather than not at all.
Hey, how ya doing?
Great video Badmouse! If I can I'd like to share a video by Saber that touches on Kenyan history and how they were put in camps by the Brits and bad their land stolen. This is the context Vaush is omitting from his debates:
th-cam.com/video/tBbRyj_GbT4/w-d-xo.html
Man, from all the things that could get you back this is what you make a video over.
Welcome back I guess!
I'm grateful he did. Vaush made some terrible and dishonest arguments in that debate and I'm happy a neutral lefty pointed it out.
@Cool Cat That's ironic considering you blatantly ignored the the core premise of the video.
@@fun_ghoul how is the US government doing genocide on black people right now? And how do they manage to do it without impacting the wealth of the bottom 50% of black earners (which is the same as the bottom 50 % of white earners). Why doesn't it show up in polls of black people, shouldn't they notice being genocided?
And why does it matter that the individual he disagrees with is a black woman? What if she was a right wing black woman, or one of many who is pro capitalist, pro droning central asians and arabs, anti-semitic, transphobic or homophobic ?
@@fun_ghoul So... you can't answer? I literally know what genocide means. Evidence an event is happening is not the same thing as the event itself. The definition of fire does not tell me a fire may be happening, but maybe smoke or sirens would help. Only you seem to be confused about that.
You are supposed to provide contemporary examples of what qualifies under the UN convention. Can't?
@@fun_ghoul So that's another no then? Providing evidence that a genocide is happening = asking you to teach what genocide is? How reasonable.
Can you link to evidence that the black population of the US, or any region of the US, thinks they are in ongoing genocide? How about a human rights organization?
How about indicators like wages, incarceration rates, death rates, migration patterns (people fleeing) etc compared to other demographics? Or you just want to pretend that people that know more than you are ignorant? Hey you can always "refuse to teach" people when they ask for evidence. Evidence they, having already held your views a decade ago, are aware does not exist.
Again, it doesn't matter to you that your analyses is inaccurate, because you only care about your personal psychological activist identity, not actually engaging with the struggles of the broader (black) working class. That is why you don't have to even get what era they are living in correct.
You are a stereotypical larping leftist (more of a radlib really) like other of that toxic activist-ist scene, because of your anger issues- not because there's a mass movement in your area that has organized or inspired you. There isn't one. I sincerely wish the best for you, and hope you get out of activist shit for awhile to get sane, and come back to it when you are in a better position.
Great video. As an African myself I was surprised how chauvinist and racist the breadtube and online communist community was, especially concerning decolonisation and self-determination. I always thought African self-determination and decolonisation was something everyone assumed and agreed with, God was I wrong lmao.
I'm a white guy, so help me understand. Would you be in favor of deporting white people from Zimbabwe or South Africa? I have no opinion on that matter.
This is what happens when former “Alt right” people saw some stuff was wrong but they didn’t listen enough and decided they should try to lead the arguments and say “I was reformed, we should reform fascists” when that’s not only dangerous for Marxists in general but these guys are...not deprogrammed to begin with, so they create this whole structure of whitetariat toxicity.
@@fun_ghoul so why haven't you come back to Europe? I'm already here, lmao
@@azrieldawson7377 Indeed
@@fun_ghoul all I hear are excuses. You can't afford a plane ticket?
What's this shapiro voice changer? 😍
Does this mean you're back!?
Please say yes. 😊