LOL molymeem got btfo by a fascist

LOL molymeem got btfo by a fascist

>n-not an argument
>gubmit is ebil talking points no matter how the conversation goes, its like talking to a recorded tape
>lost his temper
>can't understand half of what the guy said, autism probably

youtube.com/watch?v=5DCQRcFNIG8

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=UJqxVUk4SxI
hooktube.com/watch?v=6wXPbRE8d-8
hooktube.com/watch?v=V1hS_N2QQjc
cdn.media.freedomainradio.com/feed/books/UPB/Universally_Preferable_Behaviour_UPB_by_Stefan_Molyneux_PDF.pdf
hooktube.com/watch?v=yh9IPo_PtZU
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Are you implying government isn't ebil?

umm hello heathen

Jesus died for our sins, he ate our original sin, so government isn't inherently evil

go read the good book you flippin heretic

im saying that a little nuance doesnt hurt anybody instead of argument and viewing the world in absolutism like a toddler

Do you want me to die?

Inshallah.

Who is that annoying nerd who always reads comments at the beginning of his vids?

I'm more on the fascist's side of things, but he really should've read UPB before engaging in Molyneux.

That way he could've provided the arguments against him and skip a lot of bullshit.

Is it that hard to read 1 fucking book of your ideological opponent?

What the fuck kind of braindead autistic redditor do you have to be to make this 'argument'?
First off, the user you are replying to did not even reference christianity.
Second off, you are fucking retarded and know nothing about Jesus.

Not an argument.

He probably did. Dude's got like three bookshelves full of fascist literature and most of his channel is him reading and interpreting it.
Here's his version of this
youtube.com/watch?v=UJqxVUk4SxI

Upb?

what does UPD refer to branko?

government is good, (((capitalism))) is evil

>He probably did
He didn't. You can easily tell by the way someone engages with Stefan's terminology whether he's read it or not.

Universally Preferable Behavior by Molyneux

You forgot your snake flag

Define evil.
I would argue that a modern government increases the overall quality of life of the population compared to most other alternatives.
If government in the present form did not exist, some other sort of control would, be it corporate, religious, feudal, etc.

where in the video please? Don't want to listen to molyneux for an hour, to get to yet another one of Sup Forums's underwhelming 'btfo'-ings.

I didn't even know Molymeme had a book, but at any rate, I know he has read books that advocate for similar speaking/arguing tactics.

See here
hooktube.com/watch?v=6wXPbRE8d-8


Also, this whole argument was provoked when thug watched one of Molymeme's videos and made a video refuting it, leading to his followers suggesting he call-in to Molymeme's show. This is the video in question
hooktube.com/watch?v=V1hS_N2QQjc

>I didn't even know Molymeme had a book
cdn.media.freedomainradio.com/feed/books/UPB/Universally_Preferable_Behaviour_UPB_by_Stefan_Molyneux_PDF.pdf

I really recommend reading it, regardless of your position. It's short, easy to read and you will get something from it regardless of your position.

I'm really frustrated by people of our position that approach him without ever being able to predict his arguments 2 steps in advance. Maybe I'll have to call him soon.
[spoiler]If only I had a coherent ideology[/spoiler]

I watched this guys video like a week ago, he got BTFO'd.

I don't think there's any use to doing so. His tactic to things he disagrees with is picking out things that are besides the point of the person he's arguing with and debating semantics instead of addressing the argument

And good luck getting onto his show without saying that your parents are divorced

Lmao the civnat cuck got WRECKED

Molymeme worships "the free market." He goes on roundabout solutions that make no sense merely because his religion is "philosophy and the free market."

He thinks ALL socialist and government programs are bad and ALWAYS fail. A few government programs are actually fairly successful.

He keeps using the term "welfare state-" America does not have a welfare state, we have welfare programs. Some of these programs work, some don't.

He has this idea that the free market will fix all environmental problems and uses roundabout logic to do it. "If the free market were in control, we wouldn't have as many roads, and then we wouldn't have as many cars." The US government is doing a pretty good job at maintaining the environment.

>tactic
No, Stefan is absolutely right. The only point where the fascist guy objectively won was that Stefan is propaganda - which he is. There Stefan was too touchy-feely with the words, where the fascist stood firm and observed the definition and manifestation from greater distance.

It is not merely "a tactic" that Stefan uses. Most of what he said was both relevant and an argument. You have to understand that when you're arguing with Stefan, you're not really arguing "muh free markets" or "muh socialism". You're arguing morals, from which the latter extends. Anyone who doesn't understand this will get beaten by him, and that's why you need to read the goddamn book.

>And good luck getting onto his show without saying that your parents are divorced
Everyone that disagrees with him gets in front of the queue, so that's not correct.

t. democrat

...

CulturedThug is /ourguy/

Team Mosley.

>flag

Government isn't evil, it's an inefficient business. If Wal-Mart's trying to rip you off on Pringles, you can go to a competing store or buy a competing product. Or you can just not buy it at all. If enough people do this, Pringles or Wal-Mart will be forced to change their policies. If your government fucks you over, you can go wave a sign and cry about it. If you get too annoying, they can arrest you. Or shoot you. In a few years, maybe you can vote for a different politician.

>some of these programs work
What? Which?

>click the video
>i identify as a political fascist
>caller, can you define fascism?
>what a great question, stefan!
>fascism is: make america great again like united we are stronger, the collective..uhm.. it's been in germany and italy.
is it worth watching this in its entirety? the caller is retarded.

What is a welfare state if not a state with welfare programs?

>Most of what he said was both relevant and an argument
I don't know about you, but when Molyneux started going on about how government is "people, it can't possibly be a tool" and shit like that, he made himself look like a retard because that was just something that thug was saying to lead into another point as a description of his philosophy. After that, I just stopped watching because I knew the rest of the video would be more of the same.

The basic problem of this video is that Molyneux was there ready to debate while his caller wasn't familiar with the show and expected more of an interview type format.

The issue is the monopoly of violence that the government posses, if it did not exist then something or someone else would posses it or even worse, a bunch of competing interests willing and capable of using force to achieve their objectives.
I would rather have someone that is at least supposed to have my interests in mind judge me rather than a corporation for example.
Countries where the government either loses control or has complete control usually end up in a disaster, see Nazi Germany, Stalin-era USSR,Weimar Republic, 90s Russia, etc.
It's a balancing act.
Food stamps, social security, etc are pretty effective at stopping complete chaos, welfare is to some degree necessary if you remove the social support systems that existed in the past like an influential church, extended families taking care of their elders, etc.
You can argue that passing on the burden on society is wrong but if you don't replace it with anything you will likely have massive social issues and unrest.

>government is "people, it can't possibly be a tool"
Yeah, that was his weakest point, which I forgot to mention.

That's like saying that a gun isn't a tool, but an amalgamation of atoms.

You should watch the talk, I watched it twice. Stefan has the upper hand because it's his show, but ultimately he won fair and square. He didn't humiliate the guy as he did with many people, or left him confused for more than a second, but he did win.

Let me give you an example: The fascist guy simply couldn't acknowledge the theft argument, because he is not completely familiar (he did appear to know something, sort-of) with concept of government as a monopoly on use of force, which it factually is. For heaven's sake, one of basic Carl Schmidt's premises is that "sovereign is the one who decides the exceptions", and that definition extends to contemporary governments in lack of obvious rulers. They by definition decide which theft is "acceptable". Call a space a spade, and you'll have more success in engaging with him, and constructing arguments against.

For example, Spencer will acknowledge this right off the bat but will discard it's relevancy based on nietzschean stance, in style fitting to him.

To the guy that made the video, if you're reading this, just read his book. It will do you a lot of good.

>The basic problem of this video is that Molyneux was there ready to debate while his caller wasn't familiar with the show and expected more of an interview type format.
Maybe, although I don't know how you can be familiar with Molyneux (which he is, since he made response videos) yet not know how he engages in callers.

>UMM SLURP SLURP UHHHH THAT MOLYMEME AUTIST DICK IS SOOOOOOO GOOD

litterally you, dumbfuck

I've never seen a debater this shit as Molywhatever, constantly interrupting, speaking platitudes or strawmanning

Using "Not an argument" when cornered without any escape or with nothing to answer with

And boy did he get triggered, the forced laughing, smiling, you could see his blood boiling and steam coming out of his ears. What a fucking joke

i never said anything about molyneux, freaktard.
it was a direct and clear question.

Your second point is not correct. You must pull out the gibs before anything else will take it's place. If you have gibs then no one has the incentive to do the right thing or change. Will It cause chaos probably but it'll be short term chaos and long term success for society.

I think the food stamp program works pretty well. It is a low cost program that feeds a lot of people and puts money back into the hands of stores and farmers.

Public education works pretty well. I think Molymeme over-exaggerates how bad the US public education system is. He keeps calling it "useless government propaganda." Many American government run schools do a pretty decent job at teaching basic math, reading, writing, and science skills.

Roads are important. How is anyone supposed to run a business when they can't get supplies in because the trucks cant run on dirt roads?

"Welfare state" sounds really scary, and it implies central organization of welfare programs by the state. America has welfare programs that are scattered around various departments, scattered around the taxes of various state and local governments. I think the term "welfare state" is very misleading of the organization of welfare programs in the US.

If you want to risk national disintegration in the process then sure, but I'm certain that most policy makers would want to avoid that.
As it is the modern culture would probably be unable to support a shift back to early 20th century values without a focused effort to do so.

Sure you civnat cuck

This guy's definition of fascism could fit just about anything. He sounds like your typical pseudo intellectual idiot that's trying to make something sound good without ha ING anything of substance to put forward.

this is the most desperate, autistic reply i've ever got.
kys

>Many American government run schools do a pretty decent job at teaching basic math, reading, writing, and science skills.
They don't because of our forced colorblindness. If we accept that races have different IQs on average, then it is the epitome of foolishness to attempt to teach them all in the same way, and that is what is happening in American schools. Public education is trash and the very reason why degrees have become worthless.

>it implies central organization of welfare programs by the state.
Are you implying that we don't have that? What do you think federal student aid is? What do you think those food stamps that you yourself mentioned are? Sure America has different state and local welfare programs as well, but there absolutely are ones organized by the federal government

If your point is that not all of it is 100% centralized, then nowhere has ever had a welfare state, not even the Soviet Union.

>Public education is trash and the very reason why degrees have become worthless.
Yes, because a 10% literacy rate is much better.
A significant proportion of parents would not send their children to school if it was not free and mandatory.
The issue with american education is the structure, not the fact that it's public.

OP must be retarded. Caller is getting BTFO.

Wow. Mollyjew is a fucking faggot.

Hey guys communism, oops I mean fascism, never worked well before because of corrupt politicians, but if you let me enact it I will put in incorruptible people and it will totally work this time.

>What is Cloudflare
>What is Google

>Public education works pretty well
AHHHAHAHAHAHAHADSHF;DSKGH;AKDSLHG;ALS

Fuck you kid. 12 years of my life wasted.

You fucktard ancaps are fools who don't even attempt to understand fascism because you suck off corporations every bit as much as commies suck off the government, thinking that they're full of such moral and responsible people. There's no way they could have possibly caused the shit situation we're in right now, right? You don't understand this man because you only think in terms of materialism, and until you get materialist ideology out of your head, you're just going to repeat the same mistakes as the liberals you supposedly despise.

If it lead to more kids getting home schooled, that would probably be a good thing

What we are doing now is leading to disintegration. It's like saying getting people who are addicted to coke and heroine off of that would disintegrate there lives and society. That's simply not true it would lead to an increase in crime until the police could get a hold on it and It would lead to a little instability but you know what causes more instability LARGE SCALE INFLATION. The kind being cause by social programs. Largest thing we have is Medicare here in us I'm pretty sure. Welfare is the biggest expenditure. And we are basically printing the money and causing steady inflation which at some point will not be feasible. Only reason us dollar has not collapsed is because it has no currency competition. A lot of things are measured in value by usd. But inflation would be worse for stability than cutting welfare.

Go suck more government dick

Thanks for proving my point
Oh and btw, a government can be bound by its constitution and sometimes changed by the people, but at the end of the week, you'll always buy from companies that preach globalism, tolerance and diversity, because all of these are always better for business than family, unity and nationalism.

Go ahead and rely on the government to take care of you. It's never worked out well for anybody in the history of the world but I'll guess you guys will make it work this time.

This guy got blown the fuck out by Molyneux.

So fucking hard. Caller reminds me of the people at work who try to convince you to adopt a new technology or product and all of their info comes from a sales docs. This dude needs to drop the pamphlets and do some real research.

Just like you and your minarchy! There sure are a lot of successful examples of those aren't, there?

Oh wait, your point is shit because every society eventually collapses.

Goys, we are divided now. Mission complete, give french guys his shekels.
> t.worried

>What we are doing now is leading to disintegration.
It could, but removing welfare without any alternatives is arguably worse.
Because society always had and presently has safety nets, in the past it was private and social, with families taking care of their elders, the church having a massive amount of power, etc. Now it is a function of the government, if you remove the government safety nets that have been created without reintroducing the culture that provided those social safety nets you will have an issue.
>And we are basically printing the money and causing steady inflation which at some point will not be feasible.
Inflation is a non-issue with the current monetary policy, the Fed won't let it get past the 5% mark unless there is a major political shift.
A steady inflation is not a bad thing, and even necessary in an economy that is supposed to be constantly growing.
>But inflation would be worse for stability than cutting welfare.
Depends on the scale.
A 10% inflation for example would even be beneficial to some degree as it would cancel out the massive debts that are restricting growth at the moment and boost employment.
A high inflation is not necessarily a bad thing and can coencede with high growth (e.g. US during the 80s).
Also govt. spending is a small part of money creation, private bank lending creates more desu.

He's done plenty of research, he just doesn't have much debate skills.

Just look at a video like this
hooktube.com/watch?v=yh9IPo_PtZU

When was the last time you saw Molyneux discuss a book with this kind of depth

>This dude needs to drop the pamphlets

Literally repeating exactly what molymeme said. Why don't you just admit you gorge on his cock?

Why can't we have anCap with different city states. Some cities communist, some fascist. Some democratic. Etc.
I am starting to think its what a crumbling society would look like anyways.
If only there was a way to vote it in before shtf and have it happen peacefully.

He did the type of research that communists do. You have go past the theoretical and add in some reality. This is the type of shit that only works on paper because human behavior is not accounted for.

How about watching the full video before you reply

I've got 5 minutes left and caller still hasn't said anything slightly impressive.

I'd be all for what caller is saying if I thought for a second it could work, but I don't. He's an idealist with no idea of how the world really works.

I was speaking of the video that I posted. Yes, he didn't do well against Molyneux because he wasn't expecting a debate. He was prepared to explain his philosophy, not defend it

Oh, sorry. I'll check out that video next.

>Define evil.
tyranny

Because one city might collapse and everyone leaves to another city and demands it changes ideaikigies. Or one city decides it needs more.

We're just going to have to agree to disagree. The guy isnt an idiot but I just don't agree with his position. I'll take more freedom over more government any day of the week.

>2 posts by this id
a racist is smarter than the anti-racist. because he looks at the failure rate of some races, and actually responds to that data
so, what is the failure rate of states again?

>everyone leaves to another city and demands it changes ideaikigies
too bad, they signed an actual contract and its on the blockchain for everyone to see

I didn't watch the video, but...

... Molyneux is trying to lose his libertarian skin akin to a snake, right? He notices right wing opinions are becoming more and more popular, hence he tries to shift from libertarian to race realism first, then he suddenly changes opinion about religion, but of course he couldn't just do it with the tyranny of the state narrative, because it would be just too obvious shilling.

So he calls for a well informed fascist debater to destroy and humiliate him in front of his entire audience, serve as aperitif for them,and an excuse for him later on to join pro-fascist ideologies, right?

What a transparent fucking sociopath you are, Stefan. What a fucking snake.

That is not at all what happened

The guy seems to agree with the Dugin theory which actively advocates for freedom and calls it the strongest point of liberalism.

As contrary as that seems when it also advocates for collectivism (albeit not class-based collectivism), these concepts can coexist to a degree and did in most early 20th century countries, fascist or otherwise.

Please elaborate.