How can you say Hitler wasn't mentally ill? He was a vegetarian.

One clarification I will add about Christian altruism is that the individual is called to be generous and not the state. Calling upon the state to do the things you are called upon to do yourself is not altruism, and I see this conflated often.

I feel your pain. Here in Eastern Europe (Bulgaria), we experienced the horrors of Socialism and were ecstatic when the Iron Curtain fell. And yet, Socialism is still alive and well. Plenty of people, young and old, want to build a Socialist society again. The former Communist Party, just renamed itself to Socialist, and has been part of the government, even leading the government several times.

How can a man help others if he can't even help himself. Charity is great but only after you've gotten the solid foundations of your own life.

Communists do nothing but criticize.

Denial is a powerful drug Tik. Many still aren't ready to face their own childhood trauma.

I would say that on the Christian part of self-hating and self-loathing that I don't hate myself, and Jesus never says to hate yourself, but to hate the Sin in you. You are supposed to feel Guilt for what you've done, but in a way of "I need to better myself" and not "I am awful and a terrible person". Now, that may seem like hating yourself, which it kinda is because Humans are sinful in Christian Theology, but for me, I hate the Sin, not the person as a whole. I hate the Sins of Hitler, the Sins of Stalin and the Sins of myself, but not the person as a whole. That's my take on the idea of self-hating and self-loathing.

as for Rand and Social Security - she earned millions as a novelist, paid millions in taxes - and thus was 100% entitled to get social security in her old age. People who make that idiotic argument that she "didn't live according to her own rules" are worse than worms.

Communists: - TiK iS WrOnG! TiK starting a response video:: Your mother. Sorry, I mean, Lenin's mother.

Money is not the root of all evil. It's the love of money that is the root of all evil.

As a non-Lutheran, it did kinda seem like you were taking a dig at Lutheranism. I wasn't offended, but I can see why Lutherans would be.

I think what TIK really misses in his analysis of Christianity, and I commented as much on the previous video; is that the so-called ‘self-hatred’ isn’t insurmountable or fixed. It’s a call and a challenge to self-mastery. Any moral system will have a form of so-called ‘self hatred.’ That’s the admission that there is a real standard for behavior, and the acknowledgement of personal failure to measure up to it. You can’t have virtue of any kind unless there are real and tangible ways not to live up to it. Every moral system will have ‘self hatred’ whether it’s hatred of one’s sin in Christianity, or hatred of one’s lack of Bugattis in Andrew Tate’s morality. The argument against virtue from self-hatred is the exact same as the one the body positivity movement uses, even down to the language employed and it’s just as misguided there. What it really is is not an exhortation to mental health: it’s a mental default on ethical responsibility. And from a psychological perspective, any time someone attempts to live for an extended period without acknowledging ethical responsibility; they become miserable. It’s something we desperately need, even if at times it becomes challenging.

Lenin, Stalin, Mugabe, Guevara, Mao, Hitler, Mussolini, Hussein, Castro, Xi, Pol Pot, Deng Xiaoping and so many more. What do they all have in common? Socialism.

Can’t argue with gnostics. They are in a different realm.

You reminded me of an argument I had back in college with a Marxist who would not accept that "from each according to his means, to each according to his ability" is a slave mentality. He kept arguing that people shouldn't work out of self-interest. He had no idea that he was arguing for either a slave plantation without a master, or an ant colony.

Meh. Altruism is the pretense. Power is the object.

Proving the socialists wrong again, thank you Tik

The evidence that leftism is evil - 100 million bodies. The evidence that objectivism is evil - The videogame BioShock

Going down the Ayn Rand rabbit hole is much better than going down the Marxist loo.

From a non - socialist: describing socialists as lazy is just intelectual laziness.

As a child my dog stepped on a bee It traumatized me into becoming Alexander The Great And conquering Asia.

How can people not see the pattern...

Oh hey, thank you for the kind words, and for the book recommendations. One way I've argued against altruism is through a video from Smarter every day, about putting your oxygen mask on first so that you'll actually be able to help others put theirs on. You should check it out. To answer your question from the other day, the ones who taught me to be ashamed of myself were my mother and sisters, and even some teachers. I don't hate them for it, and they've somewhat reversed their position. Apparently it was me and my infinite patience that helped the most.

I thought the previous was quite a stretch too. Being a Lutheran, or any other faith or denomination, does NOT imply an extreme form of altruism. I for one have never heard or read Christian preaching that expects altruism at the level you cite, enough to explain a diversion to socialism.

Thank you, TIKHistory.

the louder the socialists and commies are,the more it proves you are actually right. keep on doing what you doing TIK,you make fantastic content. commies gonna commie as we all know

I was raised with altruism and self sacrifice to be ideals. I had a doting mother and an distant father. Depression and anxiety became difficulties in my adolescence. To deal with them I saw a shrink who basically enabled me to medicate the symptoms with prescription stimulants, tranquilizers and antidepressants. Later this would morph into illicit self medication with heroin which began during university and threw me out of sync with life and into jails, prisons and other institutions. Until my recovery 15 years ago, I was very left wing in my ideology. Today I am completely opposed to all leftist thought and doctrine. ..I mention this political shift because I believe it was the prime mover of my destruction, and shifting away from it was the catalyst for the recovery. You nailed it with the self loathing. It was an integral part of the self destruction and it is still a difficulty even after I've identified it as being only counterproductive. Looking back on it all I can see now that the depression and substance abuse were merely symptoms the warped worldview you are describing. ..However this was never addressed. Instead such symptoms were looked at as the root causes by any professional help I sought. None of which ever helped. It took me over 40 years to figure out what you are saying (more or less.) Don't let anyone tell you that what you are saying isn't extremely helpful. The one thing I would add to what you say is that it's important to realize that even the greatest thinkers are people and are prone to error whether it's A Rand, T Sowell, Buddha, Einstein or whoever they are still human. They have much help and truth to offer, but no one is complete or perfect in their thinking. And inversely, people like Marx, Lenin, Kant and other people you and I would consider mislead or generally wrong do have some accurate information to offer. People are not binary and holding either blind faith or absolute contempt of any person always to leads to disillusion. I hope this is helpful. Keep up the good work.

18:39 - classical protestant mistake that focuses on pure words instead of context. It was adressed specifically to those preaxhong not for betterment of self and others, but to target those who they deemed appropriate. Read the rest of the letter. It was basically targeted against the reasoning that fuels socialists. The message is that the ones preaching the faith should be examplary of it, above what is merely expected and do it for others, not for personal gain. Basically adressed at early priesthood.

Ayn Rand's critics apparently don't understand that being selfish doesn't negate working together on mutual goals and interests (be it in a company, in marriage or in friendship). The difference between that and altruism is that people are not morally obligated to do it, which is a good thing.

Actually, if you're going to make the argument that Christianity leads to self-hared by default you might want to properly identify the branch that is most in-line with your argument. The notion you describe, total depravity, is a Calvinist, not a Catholic position. It's why they diminish, or outright reject James 2: 24-26: “See how a person is justified by works and not by faith alone…For just as a body without a spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead.” Faith versus works is one of the fundamental schisms between Protestantism and Catholicism. If you're going to take a run at the idea that we have a fallen nature and are in need of a redeemer in a snarky manner at least get the who believes what aspect correct.

I always find it hilarious when a self-professed "socialist" gets his or her panties wadded up in proclaiming how vastly different "socialism" is from marxism/communism and how Nazism had nothing to do with socialism. As for Freud and Jung, well....I don't even think Jung's theories (to the extent that they differ from or extend Freud's work) are worthy of contemplation. I think Freud's concept of psychosexual development and the critical importance of early childhood events and traumas having massive effect on later personality development and behavioral patterns is completely valid; however, I think psychoanalysis as a therapeutic method is completely useless and helpful to only a tiny minority of patients. In most cases, psychoanalysis only aids in conditioning the patient to show up at the same place at the same time every week for the rest of his life.

33:33 You're both right, in a way. - What you miss here is, that the Narcissist (produced by the childhood factors you correctly identified), does not reflect and always projects; meaning s/he is not truly creative, cannot truly assess the world, and always accuses others (individuals as well as the world) of their own faults and sins. The Narcissists believes himself to be perfect, thus always right, thus everyone who disagrees as always wrong, thus justified to walk over corpses, thus believes himself to be altruistic and projects his own pure and deranged egotism onto everyone else who dares have more than he does. That is why the first ones to go under a narcissistic rule (tyranny) are the virtuous people who call out the emperor's new clothes. Narcissists are the "Sinners", accusing everyone else of their own sins, believing that that will heal the world, which is at fault, not them themselves.

TIK you are the best historian on KZfaq. Congratulations on your Battlestorm series😅 F*** the stick to tanks! I learn at lot with you. Keep the great work!

16:00 that part from the article is false (and the falsehood supports your case), chirstians regularly donate more of their income to charity, so much so that it can affect OTHER statistical dividing lines. The higher proportion of practicing christians in the american right is the source of the right/left charity divide (in spite of the mean income of the american left being slightly higher)

Acknowledging that you're a flawed human being is not self hatred, it's a rejection of narcissism and pride

Mao’s one child policy came from an ignorant view on how humans consume

Some of the criticism may stem from similar familial abuse. Also election season came about and sadly it seems Labour has won.

Very good work, as always. As a Buddhist I would also add that Buddha Dharma does teach altruism as well, *however* it is tempered by the concept of the "Middle Path." There is such a thing as too much altruism in Buddhism. However, just as it would be disastrous to practice only Christian altruism without the belief in a loving God, it is also awful to have Buddhist altruism without the complete understanding, which includes rejection of all forms of extremism, including extreme altruism (to the point that it ends or harms the self) That explains Mao and Pol Pot. Also, they both basically created a parody of monasticism within their movements. Both had their militants practice communal living, austere living, and chanting propaganda in replace of chanting mantras and prayers.

21:55 I think this is on point, I once heard in a KZfaq video discussing the Western World, an I’m utterly paraphrasing but it goes something like, “The Western World has been wrestling with a new world without a God to forgive them”. It’s not that Christianity doesn’t encourage altruism, a tempered relationship with the material and self sacrifice for others, to a point, (there’s that famous story about the rich man desiring to follow Jesus and Jesus demands that he gives his money to the poor, which the rich man refuses. It’s a story, in my opinion, not about unthinking altruism, but obedience to God) but it’s tethered to a loving God who’ll forgive you in spite of your flaws and assuage your guilt. Without it, the guilt remains but no man perfect enough is there to forgive you.

Good update. As a child attending Episcopal Church, then Lutheran nursery school and church for years, followed by a variety of protestant churches, I can see why specifics matter, but really the key is "altruism". Your point in that area is worthy of consideration. Like so many things in life there is a good way to handle a thing or a bad. Under obsessive approaches even the most noble thing can become corrupted.

Something I think is relevant is the idea the civilizations use certain negative emotions to unite the people, most of the world uses shame, while the west uses guilt.

You're pretty close to the mark. Altruism is part of a Christian outlook, but as you said it is tempered with many other contrasting, not conflicting, theologies in the bible. Replace hate of ones self with hatred of one sins and then you're right. Fine line, but an accurate one. It's stated when talking about a husband and wife that nobody hates their own flesh, we instead feed, dress, and take care of ourselves as a matter of course, and should show that same love to our wives and others. It's not the self we are to hate but the sin that works through ourselves. Love the sinner hate the sin. Charity is not a requisite for salvation, only faith is. When the man executed next to Jesus was saved it was noth through charity, altruism, or even a self hated, but rather a recgonition of his own faults and Christ's diety.

TIK if U-Tube harrasses you, publish your videos on Rumble.com. Do both. Rumble won't censor you.

Define "good" and "moral" without a basis in religion, especially Christianity. "Good" can then mean anything you think it should be and change with the wind.

I wonder how I recovered from being a socialist in high school while my younger brother hasn't in adulthood, this despite neither of us having had a troubled upbringing. Though my brother does have a narcissistic bend.

I'm an ancap but I used to be a commie (didn't even understand anything about politics just did what my brother did), my father was often absent and verbally abusive while my mother was always tired from work and neither of them knew what to do about my autism. My brother is transgender and they always kissed his ass even though he was nothing more than a narcissist. My brother was a huge influence on me and I might've ended up like him if he didn't end up going to college, I was into linux at the time and I started watching Luke Smith and that got me to hate my lefty redditor days. I still have a long road ahead but I thank you TIK and all the other content creators I've watched over the past few years. You guys saved me from becoming absorbed into communism.

christianity has a parable about how it's not about saving one from self hatred. The two sinners, one who humbled himself and acknowledged how he had failed, would be forgiven, but the one who was too proud to admit they had failed, could be forgiven. The one who was forgiven did not hate himself. If he hated himself, he would condemn himself to hell. He was willing to be honest about himself, and fully admit his faults so that he could better himself. He was more willing to love himself and those around him, than the proud man who refused that he had done wrong. Self hatred is bad, but that's not the primary thing one is being saved from. It could be in those with a twisted sense of pride, thinking they are too vile to be saved, but normally it's about the people who are too proud to think they need saving while they are drowning in vile acts. There's a difference between self loathing, which is prideful and assuming too much importance in one's self just in a negative sense, and humility, which is understanding and behaving properly based on where one actually is. There is also a great deal of definitions not aligning, though that happens with language drift and improper translations, such as when a king who wants to prop up the idea of the state performs a translation to encourage the worship of the state amongst a population, who happened to be named James. The best example of how wildly innacurate a pro state king's particular version is in it's translation, is how they represented Meek. The original version of the Meek shall Inherit the Earth was that Those who have the capacity for great violence, and yet remain peaceful and only use violence when the non violent routes have failed, shall gain all that is valuable under heaven. The word that we were told means meek, meant those who could be increadibly violent and unleash destruction when needed, but were self controlled enough to not do so at the wrong times. There is more, but my time is short. You aren't entirely wrong, you just haven't quite hit the bullseye in your analysis of some things.

Just funny they say narcissism is the key when the world is like 90% narcissism these days by design

You are the best

Any chance of that Frederic Bastiat video?

Believing that you are flawed = self-hatred?

Sin is not that you’re a bad person, it’s our imperfection. Sin is the fact that we are not perfect. The point is to follow in the footsteps of Jesus to attempt and to fail at reaching perfection. The realization that you will fail is to always be content with our present but to strive for a better future

Saying that people by their nature are selfish and bad is not self hatred, its just true 🤦‍♂️

I think you need to use a real world example of Christians living an altruistic communal life. The Jamestown colony of Virginia shows people living in commune-ism without "Communism". And it failed. Further, I think you need to include a point of how the Protestant ideal of self is distinct and important. It is the individual who is responsible for their eternal soul not the state or the king, nor the church or the priesthood. As you are responsible for the eternal well being, and competent to make that determination, you are also responsible for the well being in the present. Ultimately this concept lead the masses to reject kings and state, the ruling class. Communism crafted a new religion in which the kings and the state, the ruling class, were once again essential to the salvation of man. Which is why Protestant Christianity must be destroyed. Its also why you see many on the left, Democrats like Pelosi Biden etc, all coming out of the Catholic church. A strong central authority responsible for the altruistic salvation of mankind. The major socialists all coming from Lutheran backgrounds then makes more sense, because the Lutheran church is closer to Catholicism in its view of individual agency. Lutheranism held to the concepts of the Catholic church while rejecting corruption in it. So they "reformed" around a new church structure while keeping most of the doctrines. All while telling its members the church is corrupt and we need a new path to salvation.

My dad has so much self-hatred, altruistic morality system, was an abusive father, self-sacrificial (he never bought something good for himself), worked for a charity up to retirement, and had a gullible and ignorant mother, but the faith that took over was traditional religious faith rather than a communist one. And honestly, any interaction with him feels like it is smearing me with his behaviors. It is contagious of sorts. Especially since he was my own authority figure growing up, and it is still part of my subconscious. It has a very overt mental-blunting effect. I cannot think straight at all after any interaction with him. It is quite astonishing how much it affects me personality, and still does. I do not think he consciously and willingly is trying to destroy my self-image, rather it is a mental disease that memetically spreads.

If negative relationships with their fathers led these men to have lopsided views on altruism - what does this say about Ayn Rand's negative relationship with her mother affecting her views on selfishness?

The true solution is to become a Christian and place the altruism in its correct place. The altruism of Christianity is a good thing because it is subservient to God.

Hey Tik, a bit unrelated but it would be cool if you could do a bookshelf tour.

Never really comment but wanted to say thank you for your videos. I enjoy your level of research especially on these types of videos that can rile up anyone who doesn’t want to hear a researched objection/opposite opinion.

It's also sometimes difficult to accept that many of us have chosen this exact path in life. Your video helps me a lot personally. Thank you Tik, you're the best!

This is arguably your most complex video thus far, and quite possibly the most honest. Other people will comment on other areas of the video, so I will specifically address two areas which I’m not sure you have quite hit the mark (see what I did there??), and for understandable reasons. 00:13:32:49 “Christianity isn't about altruism or self-sacrifice” The reason why people have put this forward is that it is true. Christianity produces a degree of self-sacrifice, but it certainly isn’t about altruism. Dictionary definition of altruism: “disinterested and selfless concern for the well-being of others.”. In Christianity the concern is not disinterested. In any way. That’s the invention of secularists. The Christian equivalent would be “concern for the well-being of others arising from an active selfless love of God and a love for others which equals that of oneself”. It’s different, see? Not massively, but different enough for it not to be altruism. If the motivation is not out of love, but rather out of duty, then it’s out of line with Christian teaching. Quoting the Wikipedia page on altruism, in the section on Christianity, we have this alternative: “The aim and focus of Christian life is a life that glorifies God, with obeying christ's command to treat others equally, caring for them and understanding eternity in heaven is what Jesus Resurrection at calvary was all about.”. Hidden in there is the root of why the Christian life is not *about* self-sacrifice. It is one of the side-effects, but pursuing it or imposing the concept on those around you is very much against the principles of the Christian life. Therein lies one of the major misconceptions people have about what it means to live as a Christian. Motivation is everything. If you’re doing something begrudgingly, or are doing it with ulterior motives, it doesn’t do you any good from a doctrinal or salvific point of view. You need to be wanting to do it out of love for God and love for others, and without any other strings attached. When it becomes natural - something you want to do freely - then you are actually living the Christian life in an effective way. That’s what 1 Corinthians 13 is about. So the process of living as a Christian is to have your mind changed so you want to do these things out of love for God, and not because you feel obligated to. The feeling of obligation is what causes the problem. Part of the issue is that the word “altruism” covers two specific modes of action. Because it often has visible effects and action, it can be covered by true Christian motivation of love, or by other, less healthy, reasoning. As Max Scheler noted, in the latter case “love for the small, the poor, the weak, and the oppressed is really disguised hatred, repressed envy, an impulse to detract, etc., directed against the opposite phenomena: wealth, strength, power, largesse.” (Ressentiment, 1961). This reminds me of Bleak House , where Mrs Jellyby’s obsession with Borrioboola-Gha, which she imposes on her, understandably resentful, children. And there you have the pattern of imposed self-sacrifice, rather than self-sacrifice freely chosen regardless of duty. It is the coercion and imposition of it which is the problem, and which translates into resentment and a feeling of losing oneself. Which sounds very much like the pathology endured by some of our dear socialists when they were young. In short, without a living faith and assurance of salvation, coupled with a transformational life in communion with God, self-sacrifice can turn into something toxic, the antithesis to what Christianity is supposed to produce in people. “00:22:18:49 “Christianity is not about self-hatred” Again, the critics are correct, only this time moreso. Claiming Christians are supposed to be indulging in self-hatred is a dangerous distortion. The idea is to see ourselves as God sees us, as flawed but loved. Self-loathing is only appropriate if you don’t accept God’s love for you, in which case you’ve turned your back on God anyway and are not acting as a Christian. Forgiveness is something which doesn’t just apply when dealing with other people. You have to forgive yourself too, and if you have sinned against God, repentance means the slate is wiped clean and there’s no need for self-loathing anyway. A sinful nature does not make you evil. It just makes you prone to doing the wrong thing, which is something the Christian life is geared to help you overcome. Not because you can never get things wrong, but because the inner transformation which the Christian life should produce progressively makes it easier to avoid sinning, and make it easier for you to ask for forgiveness and repent. So no, self-hatred is most definitely not part of Christianity. I would be interested if you can find a passage in the Bible which says that it is.

It makes me sad to see Tik so burnt out and frustrated. I understand where that frustration comes from though. Thank you for the videos, and all the philosophy in them.

Sir, I think it would be quite valuable for you to have a video demonstrating how contemporary leftism, including mainstream parties, act from self-hatred and promote self-hatred. Thank you for your intense thinking.

14:55 - define "devote". Cause it seems due to your usage of English language (and it being shitty at describing complex things in short manner) you put way bigger weight on that statement than most christian branches do. For catholics what you seem to describe would be something above expected and required that monks and nuns do out of their free will. What we mean by "devote your life to God" is "remember abd try your best to stay faithfull to the teachings of Christ", which actually means oftentimes firstmost taking care of yourself and your close ones as majority of sins in modern life are against oneself and God, not other people. The commandment is "Do not steal", not "Give your earnings to others". Christianity is about negative rights. Going out of your way to help others is praised due to it being good, yet not required. Required things are not good, they are just not evil. It's not binary, it's a way more complex system that doesn't have clear demarcation marks..

You also have to add "Opportunity". Without opportunity Lenin would have been a nobody, Stalin would have been in Jail or psychiatric hospital, same with Mao, Castro, etc.. all of whom were nobodies in their own right, but only situation that presented itself made them into murderers. Unlike, let's say, serial killers, whom are that by their nature. Socialists usually become murders only when they have opportunities for power (there are exception such as Che). For instance obama, is worthless and fits your pattern, but as a leader of USA he didn't have the opportunity for absolute power. He still tried to grasped it, but ultimately couldn't defeat the system to obtain it. If he could? He certainly would have become mass murderer, as his ideas would continue to fail, and he would get more and more frustrated by that, blaming everybody else but himself and his ideas, ultimately becoming convinced that only "re-education" is the answer to bring about utopia.

Guilt and shame are taken away, through the sacrifice of Jesus christs. He took all our shame upon himself and justified us, in the face God, so we can be united again. So no, Christianity does not teach guilt and shame. But I admit, there are lots of denominations that do teach that, as it is very easy to manipulate the constituency that way.

I’ll say this, if there’s too much generosity, then greed is the other extreme; one side is public without self-respect while the other side is ego without compassion.

"Psychologist are not ready to face real life issues" i am late to the party but every time i read something similar i can't help but to remember my toxic ex friends, in particular one who is now a psychologist. They would abuse me in many different ways (both because of poilitics and because of childish nonsense, you know how this goes) getting to affect me a lot and she would even support it in ocasions. Per example to put it short that time in wich we were playing mudae (a discord game in wich you collect characters as if they were cards) and they saw us playing, decided to join, got mad and decided to force everyone to follow their new rules under threaths, getting to attack me in many different ways because i wasn't completly on board, she supported it, claimed I was responsible of it and was part of it. Not only they literally behaved like socialist there but they would use the fact that i don't like taxes as an excuse and parallelism to shit on me because they were doing the same shit. Or another time in wich I would share a tweet in wich a man who was in a abusive relationship complained about a bad experience with a psychologist who instead of helping him would tell him that the abuse suffered by women was more important, they got mad. It was argued that a psychologist would never do that and that he must have been a sexiest who tried to dissmis female psychologists (yeah, really) and they got mad at me when i said that psychologists could get biased too, they were offended by it, even after all she had done to me, and this is just the tip of the iceberg. While i know that there are psychologists who are actually decent (i talked with this with a few and they agreed with me) it is not hard to find ones who can't do or comprenhend the bare minimun, completly devoid of common sense but narcism. A psychologist like her should perfectly know how these things can affect people (and it indeed affected me, and she knew i had other personal issues too) yet not only she did, not only she would make fun of me at my back (i saw it) but she never bothered to apologize. They proved what kind of people they are

If a crybaby applies to an art school they need to accept him every single time

I would like to know what you've found about Jung and Frued. I think it's probably correct, but I want to know why.

Interestingly, in judaism, there are 8 tiers of _Tzedakah_ (charity,) as conceptualized by Maimonides. To quote the _Jewish virtual Library:_ The highest and most righteous form of charity is, to help sustain a person _before_ they become impoverished by offering a substantial gift in a dignified manner, or by extending a suitable plan, or by helping them find employment or establish themselves in business so as to make it unnecessary for them to become dependent on others. Essentially, "teach a man to fish." It's giving enough so that they won't _need_ charity. You can also do this form of charity for someone that falls on hard times as well, like getting evicted or fired. The idea actually makes a lot of sense as to being the highest form of charity because: 1) you avoid giving so much as to create a dependence or encourage laziness. 2) since the goal of the charity is that the recipient will be able to provide for themselves, it creates a healthy expectation of _only_ receiving that much. 3) it holds self-reliability as an expectation. 4) the resources you save by not being overly generous can go towards helping more people overall. 5) I think most importantly, the people you help get on their feet can then do the same for others, paying it forward. That's why i like this conceptualization of charity, because its a bit more robust than just altruistic self-sacrifice. Unfortunately, I don't see this conceptualization of charity being taught nearly as much as it should in Jewish circles, I imagine partially due to the secularization of American reform Judaism.

It's amazing to be with the journey with you tik. You have taught me soo much where as "the society" taught me soo little.

You should elaborate that not every Christian sect believes in the same things. There is no such thing as a generic Christianity.

Christian "limits on altruism" are not put there by Christians or theologians. They are inherent because of sin and our fallen nature. Christianity states that none are good, none can be perfect. All are sinners. That's why you're saved by grace through faith in Jesus Christ, not by works. Works are a byproduct of faith. I do appreciate your viewpoints and agree that falling away from the faith leaves people in a worse condition than they lived in previously. I just felt it right to clarify that point. You're a great researcher!

The spirit of the law is summed up with this: “And ye, be fruitful and multiply, teem in the earth, and multiply in it.” If you’re not doing that you will be unhappy and self hating.

I long ago realised that alturism is endless, and therefore devasting to oneself if you take it to extreme. Altruism must be reasonably bounded, and short term. That this is a problem for many Christians is true. There are indirect hints in Christian thinking. Three are: 2 Thess 3:10 If a man will not work he shall not eat, Ananias and Sapphira's crime was not giving a part of the money but the lie about the gift, and Mark 14:7 The poor you will always have with you. These get swamped by stronger themes about giving.

Ok, 4 minutes in and I don't know what the hell I'm listening to...

22:35 - that's just outright false. In catholicism humans are created in image if God, and by nature we are all good. It's origonal sin, something outside of us, that tempts us to sin. We just aren't strong enough to get rid of the temptation. We can only If we would be naturally evil, there would be no point in saving us. Also you seem (tho I may be wrong) to have misconception anout Hell caused by Dante's fanfic. Hell is just being away from God in afterlife. It's assumed to be shitty as God is source of all good in existance, but it's not an active punishement. Nit that we know anything beyond it, cause afterlife was never a special focus of christinaity.

Alturism is not self sacrifice. Caring for others does not necessarily come with a penalty for yourself. There is a need to emphasise the importance of alturism, because self interest combined with affordable alturism leads to superior outcomes.

One thing about the taxes-it’s not the money YOU paid into the system. That money-YOUR money-was spent before you were born. The money given to you by the government was borrowed from generations not yet conceived. That said when your moral is “might as well get when the getting is good”, it is absolutely moral to take the stolen money, because that’s just being smart enough to take advantage of the situation.

Great work, Tik

As someone who grew up without a father, I would not say that it is a path to socialism. I was born in Ukraine and all around me there were signs of how socialism and communism can influence society. My mom considers herself to be a libertarian and an atheist by the way. My mother was a perfect role figure for me, very ambitious and knowledgeable. Even though we were poor in my childhood, she prioritized my education greatly and gave me all the books I wanted. Thanks to this upbringing I was able to move to the EU and now have a high salary as a C++ programmer I even plan to open my own IT company together with my husband

This topic is scary to see how a human can become a Hitler.

They deny it because it means having to own your actions and your life. It is far easier to blame an external source for your troubles. It is all about '"I don't want to be shamed, so I will shame the outside instead".

Tik, Yaron Brook (the chairman of the board of the Ayn Rand Institute) would like to interview you on his show

"Supposedly became atheists. I say supposedly because socialism is itself a religion." Atheism is itself a religion. The concepts and precepts it uses to order the world must be accepted and implemented on faith.

Great video. As a working psychotherapist of 50 years I think you're spot on.

I grew up in Venezuela in the 90s, and witnessed my entire life change before my eyes. It scares me when people argue over political ideology when the real problem is blatant corruption and greed and how people don't implement systems to prevent that. America is home and I'm happy, but it scares me sometimes how people talk on the left and right

Question not an attack. You TIK used to be a socialist. Did you have this upbringing? Why did you switch to capitalist? This pattern is broad and subjective, define the parameters of abusive father and close to the mother?

My biggest concern was that the previous video never addressed Paul in 2 Thessalonians 3:10-11, For even when we were with you, we used to give you this order: if anyone is not willing to work, then he is not to eat, either. For we hear that some among you are leading an undisciplined life, doing no work at all, but acting like busybodies.

I know of no other channel that spends a hour of time clarifying their arguments and cementing their points in such a superlative fashion. Well done sir. Well done.

Would you open for a long term debate/discussion with another youtuber? I would be very interested

40:40 "Then learned actual economics" I understand that you're a busy person and whatnot, but I still feel that it is irresponsible for you to claim that you have "learned" economics just by reading a few books written by economists of the Austrian school. Even if the Austrian school happens to be 100% correct, which it possibly could be, I'm not saying it's impossible, it just feels silly that by studying a few books made by heterodox thinkers you have suddenly become a master of the subject. That would be like some anarchist reading a few books about the theory, reading 5 books on how to make homemade improvised explosives and calling themselves an economic genius. I think that it's important to get multiple interpretations of things, even if the interpretation you currently hold is the correct one. At the very least you can see what and why other people say what they say, and then disprove them to yourself. This also brings to mind your friend who apparently thinks that only socialists are for taxation, which, unless you actually meant statists or something, is definitely wrong. This isn't an ad populum fallacy as I'm not going to say whether or not these people are correct, but almost every economist is for some sort of taxation, whether it be mild or heavy.

Ayn Rand grew up in an era nearly devoid of an understand Eusociality or bio politics where-by kin selection renders Altruism a both self serving AND communal benefit

"Next week TIK will be mocking the Amish..."

I've had a turbulent upbringing and somewhat similar symptoms to what you have described in your previous video. My parents grew up during Soviet times, they have passed a little bit of their beliefs on me and I feel like Ive grown up in a world where that is no longer applicable, but for an Era that is now officially dead and Im not talking about the fall of Soviet. I work, I don't take pleasure in materialistic values, Im not religious, but I'm also lazy and unmotivated because I cant find something meaningful to my life. I strongly oppose socialism and it has proven to be a failed ideology. But I also greatly dislike the idea of "individualism". I believe in healthy collectivism where we respect and help each other, no matter the differences. In my personal experience with various "modern" people, I saw a pattern of extreme selfishness, inflated ego and narcissistic tendencies. The problem is radicalisation, people go to extreme ends within their views, whilst I think we should strive to do what most are not capable of - keeping balance. I wish to be a mother one day, but I feel it's impossible now in these days, because people are focused only on themselves. I felt a bit shamed from your last video, because I find meaning and strength in taking care of someone, but also receiving the same in my way. I don't think there's something inherently wrong with being altruistic. It's all about the golden mean.

14:47 -I will watch further, but so far it spunds like strawman. For example my point wasn't that christianity isn't about self-sacrifice or altruism, but that you clearly have other definition of altruism than christians use and omitted context of self-sacrifice in christianity nearly completly. Dunno about other commenters. You defined altruism as putting others before you, while I doubt anyone from my parish would define it that way including the priesthood. Altruism for us is using our oppurtinities to help others. There's no putting anyone above anyone else. It's actually about equality -recognizing commonaloty between ourself despite our different fates. Similarly self-sacrifice is far from the goal in catholicism. It is actually to be avoided if possible and you are meant to put your well-being and your close ones above the strangers. But if you decide to sacrifice something of yours, purley of yours, for a good deed, then it's deemed as good. But it's not a requirement or something pushed. Only appreciated specifically because the cost of such thing is high. Expected things aren't praised or apprexiated, because they are expected and therefore common. Martyrdom isn't expected of anyone for example, but it is praised for the price is the greatest. But that's in context of the cause and situation one finds itself. Seeking martyrdom is actually a sin as suicide by proxy. Suicide as a whole is frowned upon. One should do everything one can to prevent one's death. My issue was lack of context and what seemed like lack of understanding of actuall philosophical stance of the biggest branches of christianity, while focusing on germanic language definitions of the words and whatever the fuck your local protestants and lutherans are doing. Which cannot be in no way applied to christianity as a whole.

Making a positive change in the world ≠ giving up literally everything you have. Honestly you are the first perosn I've heard this definition of altruism where you surrender everything to others

Hi TIKhistory, I noticed similar elements in the pattern between the childhoods and my own upbringing although there were differences. I never became Altruistic, I don't think it's good to help others if it's against your own personal interests. I'm a lifelong Christian and quite religious, I was a Catholic until 2018 and have been a Protestant since 2018 btw and I like your videos. I also never had parental issues and adopted a strongly individualistic worldview which probably explains why I never became a socialist and I'm not lazy. Although I'm very economically liberal and capitalistic and socially Conservative with nationalism being a core element of it. I may not agree with all of your views TIKhistory but I still love your videos.

18:18 it should be noted that "love your fellow as yourself" is verse from the Hebrew Bible - this is why Judaism teaches that one must balance caring for yourself & caring for others. (I once heard a Rabbi that said that there are two categories of ideas in Christianity: 1, the ideas that are TRUE. 2, the ideas that are NEW. -the ideas that are TRUE aren't NEW & the ideas that are NEW aren't TRUE.)