Auf YouTube findest du die angesagtesten Videos und Tracks. Außerdem kannst du eigene Inhalte hochladen und mit Freunden oder gleich der ganzen Welt teilen.
Promoting socialism is fine. “Promoting” socialism by kneecapping Democrats, airing “pro socialism” content which will have as its sole and only impact in the actual real world, to give aid and comfort to people who are actually trying to destroy socialism (like, very literally, in the sense of shooting socialists with real bullets), and cloaking in it this veneer of “oh yeah it makes perfect sense because the opponents of the socialism-shooters aren’t doing ENOUGH and so it makes total sense to focus energy on damaging them, instead of on, idk, promoting socialism and socialist outcomes,” is less fine.
I really feel like you replied without watching the video because none of that is from the video.
The video explains what a sacrificial villain is in the context of a two-party partisan legislator, expands on why this is necessary in modern politics, then encourages the viewers to continue to support more progressive Democrats so that the strategy is more difficult to pull off successfully without alienating large populations of voters.
I really feel like you replied without watching the video
That is accurate yes. I’ve watched Second Thought videos before, and I’m familiar.
because none of that is from the video
The fuck it isn’t. I decided it was probably unfair for me to get into too much of a back and forth about the video without having any idea what’s in it, even though I am highly confident that it’s shit. So, I grabbed the transcript quickly and asked ChatGPT to summarize the whole thing in bullet points. That way I can still switch away quickly and hurt it with the algorithm.
Here’s what it came up with:
Introduction to Second Thought: The channel is 100% viewer-funded, encouraging support through Patreon.
2024 Election and Biden’s Approval Rating: Biden’s approval rating is very low, and his failure to fulfill several key promises like the $15 minimum wage, federal right to abortion, and significant student debt cancellation is highlighted.
Broken Promises and Blame on Republicans: Despite having a Democratic majority for two years, Biden blames Republican obstruction for his unfulfilled promises.
Democratic Control and Disappointments: Even with control of the presidency, Senate, and House in 2021, Democrats failed to deliver on progressive promises, leading to disappointment among voters.
Bullshit. The student debt cancellation in particular is transparently false to blame on Biden since he tried to do much more than the rest of the system (the Supreme Court in particular) allowed him to do.
I listed some key accomplishments above. I actually am fairly content with how accurately I guessed what kind of transparent bullshit and Biden-blaming and failing to recognize important stuff he actually did accomplish, was in this video.
Now it gets interesting:
Obstructionist Democrats: The video mentions the recurring issue of Democratic senators like Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema obstructing progressive legislation, drawing parallels with past figures like Joe Lieberman.
Lobbying Influence: Lobbying and corporate donations are identified as major influences on conservative Democrats, who often block progressive policies due to financial incentives.
Revolving Door and Career Incentives: The potential for lucrative lobbying jobs post-politics motivates some Democrats to obstruct progressive legislation to stay in the good graces of corporate donors.
If this was the core of the video, it’d be grand. “How do we get rid of the Manchins of the world” sounds great. “How do we blame Biden for anything and make sure we don’t vote for Democrats” is guaranteed to make things worse. Like I say, I’m actually fairly happy with how well I was able to determine what was in the video just from the thumbnail, title, and what channel it’s from.
No Labels Organization: Founded in 2010, No Labels aims to bring together centrists and moderates, often funded by Republican donors, to undermine progressive candidates.
Democratic Leadership’s Role: Democratic leadership actively supports centrist candidates who obstruct progressive policies, revealing a strategy to maintain corporate support while appearing progressive.
Managed Democracy Concept: The thesis borrows from Sheldon Wolin’s “Democracy Inc.”, arguing that gridlock and obstruction are intentional to prevent majority rule and maintain corporate influence.
Yeah. More good stuff. It’s a big problem. Let me guess - the solution is not to vote for Biden Harris.
Systemic Gridlock: The design of the American political system, with its gridlocked Congress, ensures that corporate interests are prioritized over majority rule.
Democrats’ Dual Strategy: To remain in power, Democrats need to appear progressive while catering to corporate interests, resulting in a strategy of controlled obstruction by a few key figures.
Electoral Politics and Voter Demobilization: Elections focus on mobilizing voters with progressive rhetoric, but post-election, corporate interests take precedence, leading to voter disillusionment.
Yeah. All of this stuff is pretty bad.
Honestly? If this video was being made in 1995 or 2004, it’d be great. Since then we’ve moved on to an actually progressive Democrat in the White House, against all fuckin odds, and the Republicans have moved on to actually wanting to shoot all the Democrats, let alone what they want to do to the socialists.
Long-term Implications: The video concludes that radical change in the US will not come from the Democratic Party but from organized mass movements, as the party is too entrenched in corporate interests.
Accurate yes
Support and Community Engagement: The video ends by promoting its Patreon and Discord community, emphasizing the importance of viewer support for independent, principled socialist content
So, I was right that you didn’t watch the video, and instead of watching the video, you STILL did not watch the video. And you STILL don’t know what the core of the video is about because AI is shit at summarizing stuff like this. It wants to present a list of talking points, but does not know how to emphasize important parts or highlight which parts were focused on the longest.
I don’t have the time to debunk all of this gish-gallop. The main points are that what you identified as “If this was the core of the video, it’d be grand” and “More good stuff” - IS the core of the video - taking up, a roughly estimated, 15 minutes of the 21-minute video runtime. Your speculation that “The solution is not to vote for Biden/Harris” is incorrect, as the actual call to action was to be more active in Democratic primaries. (Specifically calls out George Ladimer vs Jamal Bowman in New York as an example).
Honestly? If this video was being made in 1995 or 2004, it’d be great.
Yeah, pretty much exactly what I said in my original comment. Most of this video is providing historical context and explaining how the modern American political-economic system works.
You almost sold me on the value of reading the whole transcript over, and seeing what I thought of it, to see if there’s something to what you were saying. I mean, that’s not at all what a “Gish Gallop” is, but you’re not wholly off base on it being maybe off base for me to read the bullet point transcript and assume that GPT got the whole thing perfectly right.
So, I read the first paragraph of the real transcript.
Way 2024 is an election year, and unfortunately for Biden, his approval rating is in the toilet. I won’t go through his whole track record, but just to refresh your memory, Biden promised a $15 minimum wage and didn’t deliver. He promised to enshrine the federal right to abortion and didn’t do that either. He promised to cancel about $10,000 of student debt per person and ultimately came in way under that number. And then, of course, you have the recent stuff with the southern border where Biden’s being far more xenophobic and draconian than most Republicans, even after calling Trump out for the same thing and promising to put a stop to the border wall, which he also didn’t do. You get the picture. But politicians never keep their promises, so no one’s really surprised. Even now, as we’re hearing the Biden campaign make basically the same promises, it’s because, trust me, this time is going to be totally different. They just needed more time. Now that he’s on the campaign trail, Biden is mostly pinning the blame for this sort of stuff on Republicans. It’s time to rally every last Democratic voter behind him, and with a solidly Republican House and a sort of blue Senate at the moment, the reason things like that border bill didn’t get through was because it was blocked by a strong Republican opposition. So it makes sense that Biden is really keen on making them look like obstructionists. But that really doesn’t explain all the broken promises.
I think we’re done here.
If you want, you could ask Linkerbaan what country they’re from and why they have so much specific interest in US politics. I sort of get why they interpret it as an attack, but it doesn’t really have to be – it’s more of just a curiosity question, and you can also sort of get, presumably, why someone might be interested in the answer to the question.
So, to be clear, after 3 highly confrontational comments about how bad the contents of the video are, you STILL have not watched it? I think you are right, we are done here. This was such a weird pro-ignorance hill to die on.
Ok, will do! You have fun ignoring facts that are contradictory to your worldview. At least we agree that it was “unfair for [you] to get into too much of a back and forth about the video without having any idea what’s in it.”
Because it is propaganda shit
Promoting socialism is fine. “Promoting” socialism by kneecapping Democrats, airing “pro socialism” content which will have as its sole and only impact in the actual real world, to give aid and comfort to people who are actually trying to destroy socialism (like, very literally, in the sense of shooting socialists with real bullets), and cloaking in it this veneer of “oh yeah it makes perfect sense because the opponents of the socialism-shooters aren’t doing ENOUGH and so it makes total sense to focus energy on damaging them, instead of on, idk, promoting socialism and socialist outcomes,” is less fine.
Hope this helps explain the difference
I really feel like you replied without watching the video because none of that is from the video.
The video explains what a sacrificial villain is in the context of a two-party partisan legislator, expands on why this is necessary in modern politics, then encourages the viewers to continue to support more progressive Democrats so that the strategy is more difficult to pull off successfully without alienating large populations of voters.
That is accurate yes. I’ve watched Second Thought videos before, and I’m familiar.
The fuck it isn’t. I decided it was probably unfair for me to get into too much of a back and forth about the video without having any idea what’s in it, even though I am highly confident that it’s shit. So, I grabbed the transcript quickly and asked ChatGPT to summarize the whole thing in bullet points. That way I can still switch away quickly and hurt it with the algorithm.
Here’s what it came up with:
Bullshit. The student debt cancellation in particular is transparently false to blame on Biden since he tried to do much more than the rest of the system (the Supreme Court in particular) allowed him to do.
I listed some key accomplishments above. I actually am fairly content with how accurately I guessed what kind of transparent bullshit and Biden-blaming and failing to recognize important stuff he actually did accomplish, was in this video.
Now it gets interesting:
If this was the core of the video, it’d be grand. “How do we get rid of the Manchins of the world” sounds great. “How do we blame Biden for anything and make sure we don’t vote for Democrats” is guaranteed to make things worse. Like I say, I’m actually fairly happy with how well I was able to determine what was in the video just from the thumbnail, title, and what channel it’s from.
Yeah. More good stuff. It’s a big problem. Let me guess - the solution is not to vote for
BidenHarris.Yeah. All of this stuff is pretty bad.
Honestly? If this video was being made in 1995 or 2004, it’d be great. Since then we’ve moved on to an actually progressive Democrat in the White House, against all fuckin odds, and the Republicans have moved on to actually wanting to shoot all the Democrats, let alone what they want to do to the socialists.
Accurate yes
Yawn
So, I was right that you didn’t watch the video, and instead of watching the video, you STILL did not watch the video. And you STILL don’t know what the core of the video is about because AI is shit at summarizing stuff like this. It wants to present a list of talking points, but does not know how to emphasize important parts or highlight which parts were focused on the longest.
I don’t have the time to debunk all of this gish-gallop. The main points are that what you identified as “If this was the core of the video, it’d be grand” and “More good stuff” - IS the core of the video - taking up, a roughly estimated, 15 minutes of the 21-minute video runtime. Your speculation that “The solution is not to vote for Biden/Harris” is incorrect, as the actual call to action was to be more active in Democratic primaries. (Specifically calls out George Ladimer vs Jamal Bowman in New York as an example).
Yeah, pretty much exactly what I said in my original comment. Most of this video is providing historical context and explaining how the modern American political-economic system works.
You almost sold me on the value of reading the whole transcript over, and seeing what I thought of it, to see if there’s something to what you were saying. I mean, that’s not at all what a “Gish Gallop” is, but you’re not wholly off base on it being maybe off base for me to read the bullet point transcript and assume that GPT got the whole thing perfectly right.
So, I read the first paragraph of the real transcript.
I think we’re done here.
If you want, you could ask Linkerbaan what country they’re from and why they have so much specific interest in US politics. I sort of get why they interpret it as an attack, but it doesn’t really have to be – it’s more of just a curiosity question, and you can also sort of get, presumably, why someone might be interested in the answer to the question.
So, to be clear, after 3 highly confrontational comments about how bad the contents of the video are, you STILL have not watched it? I think you are right, we are done here. This was such a weird pro-ignorance hill to die on.
Have fun with your propaganda, okay? I hope your disinformation videos go really, really well.
Ok, will do! You have fun ignoring facts that are contradictory to your worldview. At least we agree that it was “unfair for [you] to get into too much of a back and forth about the video without having any idea what’s in it.”