Richard Spencer vs Joel Davis: Imperialism vs Nationalism

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 9 พ.ย. 2024

ความคิดเห็น • 57

  • @bloom2887
    @bloom2887 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +54

    An American, an Irishman, and an Australian walk into a podcast…

  • @TimeToFlush
    @TimeToFlush 4 หลายเดือนก่อน +23

    Outline:
    1. Introduction
    2. Richard Spencer's Perspective on Empire
    3. Joel Davis's Defense of Nationalism
    4. Analysis of the Russia-Ukraine Conflict
    5. Implications for Global Power Structures
    6. Conclusion
    Study Questions:
    1. How do Richard Spencer and Joel Davis differ in their views on the role of Empire in shaping international relations?
    2. What historical examples do the speakers reference to support their arguments regarding imperialism and nationalism?
    3. In what ways do the speakers connect the Russia-Ukraine conflict to broader themes of Empire and nationalism?
    4. How do Spencer and Davis address the potential outcomes of a shift in global power dynamics towards nationalism or Empire?
    5. What are the key factors that influence the speakers' perspectives on the balance between national sovereignty and imperial influence in the modern world?
    Multiple-Choice Questions:
    1. According to Richard Spencer, what is a central thesis regarding Empire?
    A) Empire is avoidable
    B) Nationalism is the key to global stability
    C) Empire is unavoidable
    D) Nationalism leads to conflict
    Answer: C) Empire is unavoidable
    2. How does Joel Davis characterize the relationship between nationalism and human nature?
    A) Nationalism is a recent phenomenon
    B) Nationalism suppresses individual identity
    C) Nationalism is inherent in human nature
    D) Nationalism is a product of modernity
    Answer: C) Nationalism is inherent in human nature
    3. What event sparked the Russia-Ukraine conflict according to the speakers?
    A) Economic sanctions on Russia
    B) Ukraine's desire to join NATO
    C) Russia's imperial ambitions
    D) Ukraine's rejection of the EU
    Answer: B) Ukraine's desire to join NATO
    4. How do Spencer and Davis view the potential outcomes of the Russia-Ukraine conflict in relation to global power structures?
    A) Collapse of both nations
    B) Rise of new empires
    C) Shift towards nationalism
    D) Expansion of NATO
    Answer: B) Rise of new empires
    5. What is a key consideration in the debate regarding the balance between nationalism and Empire?
    A) Preservation of cultural heritage
    B) Formation of a competent managerial elite
    C) Promotion of global cooperation
    D) Emphasis on individual freedoms
    Answer: B) Formation of a competent managerial elite

  • @toast2610
    @toast2610 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +17

    Rome Wharship. Spencer never gave a moral argument. Nietzsche is strong with him.

  • @watwur
    @watwur 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +20

    This is hot stuff

    • @AltF-dl2ks
      @AltF-dl2ks 4 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

      You can find this at a number of places

    • @MacNur-tu3cq
      @MacNur-tu3cq 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      I'm thinkin bout them caramelized onions

    • @frauleinhohenzollern
      @frauleinhohenzollern 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Yep every time we sit and debate like this, immigrants stop coming across the border. So these debates are very very useful

    • @frauleinhohenzollern
      @frauleinhohenzollern 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      It's just baffles me why we aren't debating And discussing how to grow our reach and strategize how to do something productive. Anything.

  • @EuropeanEmpireEU
    @EuropeanEmpireEU 20 วันที่ผ่านมา +3

    🙋🏼‍♂️🇪🇺⚡️

  • @TheWayoftheSith
    @TheWayoftheSith 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    States and Social Revolutions: A Comparative Analysis of France, Russia and China, is an example of Theda Skocpol work that Joel Davis was referencing.

  • @sdjslkdjlsskldjslkdjsl8262
    @sdjslkdjlsskldjslkdjsl8262 20 วันที่ผ่านมา

    50000x more interesting than boomercon "woke college student destroyed" type content

  • @DeadSoon1945
    @DeadSoon1945 4 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

    Spencer is just being a political realist. There's no real conflict that I can see.

  • @DeadSoon1945
    @DeadSoon1945 4 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Joel seems irritated that Spencer basically agrees ;-)

  • @MacNur-tu3cq
    @MacNur-tu3cq 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Good discussion. Shame i missed itvwhen it happened. Thanks fir uploads. Please more

  • @lazio6804
    @lazio6804 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +12

    when did this originally air?

    • @apollonian_order
      @apollonian_order  9 หลายเดือนก่อน +18

      2022

    • @MacNur-tu3cq
      @MacNur-tu3cq 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      ​@@apollonian_orderthanks. Can you please include dates in titles or description? Cheers

  • @frauleinhohenzollern
    @frauleinhohenzollern 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    The way Richard Spencer speaks just kind of strikes me as pretentious. Like he's trying too hard

  • @evolassunglasses4673
    @evolassunglasses4673 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Thanks for posting.

  • @Stentron
    @Stentron 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Thanks for the upload. Enjoyed this one.

  • @TheWayoftheSith
    @TheWayoftheSith 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Asymmetric power is dominance not whatever Joel made up.

  • @martinjacobsen5073
    @martinjacobsen5073 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    I liked this discussion

  • @xMXWLx
    @xMXWLx 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    this is like the opposite end of socialism vs communism. one can and probably will lead to the other.

  • @nocomment5705
    @nocomment5705 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

    Joel is right in the sense that if an empire or a nation wants to be successful it has to put the interests of it's founding/dominating/majority stock/ethnos first.
    But generally Richard is right that the Empire is the main vessel of world politics and the only political entity capable of sovereignty. And if you want to implement any real policies, including those of racial preservation or desirable demographic or migration policies, you have to have ultimate sovereignty and only the Empire is capable of achieving that.
    As for the Ukraine situation, Joel is ultimately right. If the Ukrainians have agency then they are the most stupid people ever to walk the earth. And if they don't have agency, then the Western elites have led them down this path. Russian actions are brutal and tragic, but ultimately they had no choice, and they are gonna get even more brutal and are gonna win even more the longer this war lasts as the stakes(losses) get higher.
    Richard's European nationhood isn't coming any time soon. If history has taught us anything, it is that Europeans are gonna turn on each other in order to reach for better deals with the new players in town, that being the Russians and the Chinese. Hungarian example teaches us that already. And Russia of today lacks the feudal backwardness of Imperial Russia and the ideological rigidity of Soviet Russia, thus being in a way even more dangerous for the EU/NATO. Surely bad times ahead for Europe. Less so for GB/USA.

  • @LiquidDemocracyNH
    @LiquidDemocracyNH 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Are there any books from which Spencer derives his ideas about Empire?, I've never heard any of this before

  • @browngreen933
    @browngreen933 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Good stuff. Subbed.

  • @rhysnichols8608
    @rhysnichols8608 4 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    What’s the difference between the German empire and German nation? Germany as it was in 1914 was basically a large German nation, Saxons, Bavarians, Prussians, Würtenberg’ers etc are all Germans with same culture and heritage. Aside from the polish areas to the east, For the Germans living in the ‘empire’ it was more a sense of a unified nation not a foreign domination.
    Ofc this was vert different when concerning over seas colonies, THIS was the true aspect of imperialism, but as for Europe large nations are the way, it only becomes an empire when you are dominating and controlling foreign peoples. If half of France was in the German empire then that would be imperialism, but it wasn’t. It was a large German nation.

    • @Seanain_O_hEarchai
      @Seanain_O_hEarchai 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

      The Germans meant an empire as in a union of multiple kingdoms. Joel means an empire as in a union of multiple nations.

  • @_Singularity_
    @_Singularity_ 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    When is this from?

  • @user-gt2pn4vt4j
    @user-gt2pn4vt4j 4 หลายเดือนก่อน

    02:03:00

  • @DeepFakeLatte
    @DeepFakeLatte 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    "Parasitic Rentier Class"

  • @Oscarbasedhead
    @Oscarbasedhead 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    🐸👍🏼

  • @DavidBaumblatt-Terebinth
    @DavidBaumblatt-Terebinth 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

    ;..........

  • @rontennis6569
    @rontennis6569 6 หลายเดือนก่อน +9

    Back when Joel spoke well. Now he's just a dead-eyed, humourless thug

    • @lioncross1849
      @lioncross1849 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      What did I miss? Is Joel in the bad books now?

    • @EVROPAEAESTHETICA
      @EVROPAEAESTHETICA 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +24

      @@lioncross1849 Joel is engaged in explicitly NatSoc IRL activism and gives more grug, “Browns bad! Browns, leave!” takes rather than highly intellectual ones.
      I’m proud of Joel for not staying in purely abstract analysis but bringing ideas into action.

    • @phonkphonk
      @phonkphonk 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +8

      Joel still speaks well. You're just selecting for what you characterize as "dead-eyed, humourless thug" ... you've likely got a low tolerance for this type of thing and therefore shut him out and as a result shutout any and all of his new high intellectual expressions

    • @ragnarok283
      @ragnarok283 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      @@lioncross1849no he is evolving, not like many others. Probably not being a grifter helped him

  • @beyongate
    @beyongate 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    First

  • @Steamplague
    @Steamplague 3 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Nationalism and imperialism is a shit combo

  • @arekhautaluoma4276
    @arekhautaluoma4276 5 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    both suck

    • @Seanain_O_hEarchai
      @Seanain_O_hEarchai 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +8

      They’re the only two options.